4 ms·

Briar will thrive once EU Chat Control 2.0 passes, P2P E2E encryption is the only way to bypass bullshit laws.

by imhoguy 3mo ago

zelphirkalt 3mo ago
Only, if they manage to improve it, so that regular photos and voice messages can be sent. I am mostly fine with texting only, but such things are an instant no-go for most people.
joecot 3mo ago
Briar is dead because it doesn't work on iPhones. It doesn't work on iPhones because iOS will only allow waking the app from background when there's a push notification. Push notifications have to go through Apple's servers, which defeats the purpose of a decentralized app where your messages (and metadata) can't be traced.
- lou1306 3mo ago
  What about a "fake push" that does not leak message contents, sender etc.? Fuzz the time the push notification is sent by a random amount of time and you have something plausibly private given the constraints?
  - _heimdall 3mo ago
    You're still dependent on Apple continuing to allow such a use. If the goal is messaging that avoids government spying or censorship its a lost cause - the government would simply compel Apple to pull the app in their jurisdiction.
  - thayne 3mo ago
    That still exposes some metadata. Depending on your threat model, leaking the timing may or may not be a problem. Also, how do you avoid leaking the sender? You can avoid giving Apple that information by routing the notification through a server, but then that server would know the sender and recipient.
  - joecot 3mo ago
    Briar is designed to work over 1) tor, 2) ad-hoc wifi, 3) bluetooth. None of those are going to be conducive to sending push notifications through Apple's servers.
- KennyBlanken 3mo ago
  There are numerous iPhone apps that don't need push notifications and sync just fine. "Open source programmers do not understand how to code properly for iOS" != "doing things in the background is IMPOSSIBLE on iOS!!!!!" People just love to screech about iOS/Apple being evil.
  - frollogaston 3mo ago
    Could come from Apple publicly saying a while back that killing apps doesn't save battery life because apps can't wake in the background. Might be sound advice not to kill apps, but part of that was factually untrue.
- frollogaston 3mo ago
  There is https://developer.apple.com/documentation/backgroundtasks https://developer.apple.com/documentation/backgroundtasks which requires the user to have "background app refresh" enabled
tensegrist 3mo ago
only insofar as it is 1. not illegal to do so or 2. the cost-benefit of violating such laws makes sense for the majority of users, who are not doing things that are actually illegal because without such a critical mass of normal users you get something like tor or grapheneos that the state begins to associate with people engaging in unsavoury activity
dewey 3mo ago
No, because most people (not on HN) value convenience much higher than privacy.

Briar will thrive once EU Chat Control 2.0 passes, P2P E2E encryption is the only way to bypass bullshit laws.

by imhoguy 3mo ago

Briar will thrive once EU Chat Control 2.0 passes, P2P E2E encryption is the only way to bypass bullshit laws.

Only, if they manage to improve it, so that regular photos and voice messages can be sent. I am mostly fine with texting only, but such things are an instant no-go for most people.

joecot 3mo ago

Briar is dead because it doesn't work on iPhones. It doesn't work on iPhones because iOS will only allow waking the app from background when there's a push notification. Push notifications have to go through Apple's servers, which defeats the purpose of a decentralized app where your messages (and metadata) can't be traced.

lou1306 3mo ago
What about a "fake push" that does not leak message contents, sender etc.? Fuzz the time the push notification is sent by a random amount of time and you have something plausibly private given the constraints?
- _heimdall 3mo ago
  You're still dependent on Apple continuing to allow such a use. If the goal is messaging that avoids government spying or censorship its a lost cause - the government would simply compel Apple to pull the app in their jurisdiction.
- thayne 3mo ago
  That still exposes some metadata. Depending on your threat model, leaking the timing may or may not be a problem. Also, how do you avoid leaking the sender? You can avoid giving Apple that information by routing the notification through a server, but then that server would know the sender and recipient.
- joecot 3mo ago
  Briar is designed to work over 1) tor, 2) ad-hoc wifi, 3) bluetooth. None of those are going to be conducive to sending push notifications through Apple's servers.
KennyBlanken 3mo ago
There are numerous iPhone apps that don't need push notifications and sync just fine. "Open source programmers do not understand how to code properly for iOS" != "doing things in the background is IMPOSSIBLE on iOS!!!!!" People just love to screech about iOS/Apple being evil.
- frollogaston 3mo ago
  Could come from Apple publicly saying a while back that killing apps doesn't save battery life because apps can't wake in the background. Might be sound advice not to kill apps, but part of that was factually untrue.
frollogaston 3mo ago
There is https://developer.apple.com/documentation/backgroundtasks https://developer.apple.com/documentation/backgroundtasks which requires the user to have "background app refresh" enabled

tensegrist 3mo ago

only insofar as it is 1. not illegal to do so or 2. the cost-benefit of violating such laws makes sense for the majority of users, who are not doing things that are actually illegal because without such a critical mass of normal users you get something like tor or grapheneos that the state begins to associate with people engaging in unsavoury activity

dewey 3mo ago

No, because most people (not on HN) value convenience much higher than privacy.