10 ms·
Bitmessage - a P2P communications protocol to send encrypted messages
- yial 14y agoBM-BcTbch6A31m9zmA852xoTznmuPac9dS7 ;)
- dok 14y agoIf you want to test your address. There is an echo server with the address: BM-orkCbppXWSqPpAxnz6jnfTZ2djb5pJKDb
- amitdugar 14y agoThis looks interesting. Thank you for making this open source. BM-opoQdjrXhZtCaZApEDDxmFtnMpXkLDqTs :)
- shocks 14y agoBM-oqP41c8hK1YpawSWjJc6wAn7JN4WH2q5i :)
- shocks 14y agoCould someone that is down voting care to explain why?
- unimpressive 14y ago>Bitmessage is in need of an independent audit to verify its security. Just saying.
- drivebyacct2 14y agoWhat, exactly, are you saying? It's certainly much better than people who blindly proclaim to be secure and don't even make an effort to be transparent or truly secure in their actions.
- chickopozo 14y agoHe's saying it should not be considered secure until proven.
- stormbrew 14y agoAnd we're back to Waste again. ;) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WASTE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WASTE for those who don't know)
- kaoD 14y agoNot at all. This is more like Bitcoin. Instead of separate subnets, you have a huge network where all clients receive all messages. WASTE looks cool though. I've been concerned with communications lately, any other secure messaging alternatives? PS: BM-oqqCRUMao1hb5E1vyxJXkRLxdshzLDz1P
- ThePinion 14y agoTried compiling latest beta but I think the wxwidgets in repositories are too new. I keep getting deprecation warnings and then an error when trying to "make" (./compile works just fine.) Bitmessage did however work for me. I was able to send a message. Haven't received one though...
- stormbrew 14y agoWASTE is quite old and bitrotted. It's possible there's updated versions out there, but it effectively got killed when AOL forced Nullsoft to stop developing it. It was a bit before its time, really.
- famulus 14y agoI feel like bitcoin is the leading edge of a wave of peer to peer encrypted technologies. Namecoin is also interesting. http://www.reddit.com/r/bitmessage http://www.reddit.com/r/bitmessage http://www.reddit.com/r/namecoin http://www.reddit.com/r/namecoin
- sneak 14y agoWhy does nobody use URIs? At least bittorrent magnet links got this right. We have standards for a reason, guys. Furthermore, any system in which all nodes receive all messages will not scale. Additionally, without proof-of-work, it is trivial to disable the network through flooding.
- xyzzy123 14y ago> Why does nobody use URIs? At least bittorrent magnet links got this right. Because a public key on its own isn't that useful as the address of a resource? > Additionally, without proof-of-work "In order to send a message through the network, a proof‐of‐work must be completed in the form of a partial hash collision." - paper, section 3. > any system in which all nodes receive all messages will not scale They discuss this in section 4 of the paper.
- stormbrew 14y ago> Because a public key on its own isn't that useful as the address of a resource? Why not? If I can send a message to someone with their public key, it is a resource address. At least, I assume he's talking about these "BM-BcJFNZDyzQKXCVJZtBJGqoon2f7GKo6s" (that's the author's) strings people are sharing. It could easily be bm:BcJFNZDyzQKXCVJZtBJGqoon2f7GKo6s and that would be a valid URI if the scheme were registered.
- zanny 14y agoI'm always mad at URI's because file: required redundant slashes (ex: file:///bin) until RFC3986 (which allowed file:/bin) but most apps that use URIs (such as browsers, or Dolphin) still throw in the redundant host slashes.
- gesman 14y agoLet redundant slashes be our last problem on the internet. Amen!
- xyzzy123 14y ago
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- juskrey 14y agoThe biggest downside: If the sender transmits message to network and goes offline for forever, and recepient goes online to pick up message only two days or more after that, he will never receive a message.
- kaoD 14y agoSomeone has set up an image board: BM-BbbuVnYuaSY6yjyhfQm5KVrJLqjiyetB Subscribe to (and share) base64-encoded[1] images. Just send the base64 encoded image to the above Bitmessage address and it will be auto-relayed to subscribers. Don't forget putting the file name and extensions as the subject! BEWARE! Medium/big images (>1Mb) may take hours to be work-proven before being sent. [1] Convenient online encoding/decoding (even from/to binaries) http://www.motobit.com/util/base64-decoder-encoder.asp http://www.motobit.com/util/base64-decoder-encoder.asp
- BHSPitMonkey 14y agoBetter yet, modify the client to look for messages that look like (b64-encoded) images and display them in the UI.
- BHSPitMonkey 14y agoAlso, here is a little JSFiddle that can transform the encoded text into a viewable image using JavaScript in the browser. It could be easily extended to handle HTML5 audio and video formats, as well as automatic type detection. Additionally, It seems that (at least with Chrome) the browser doesn't care which filetype you specify; An <img> tag will render JPEG data prefixed with "image/png". http://jsfiddle.net/RKNUM/ http://jsfiddle.net/RKNUM/
- RK 14y agoI was just recently wondering if you could use the bitcoin-style blockchain concept to implement encrypted "email". It looks like this does exactly that... Their white paper seems to address some issues such as proof-of-work, spam, and scalability (you'd likely have a much larger blockchain than with bitcoin). I remember a proposal from a while ago by someone else that was essentially a PGP-encrypted RSS scheme. You encrypted each message for the intended recipient and recipients would subscribe (or choose not to) to a sender's feed. Bitmessage seems to have the advantage of being peer-to-peer, so RSS broadcast is not an issue.
- chickopozo 14y agoGreat another unproven tool tech "journalists" will be dangerously touting as secure. See: cryptocat.
- lucb1e 14y agoI had the exact same idea two days ago but didn't think it was a good idea. For money (Bitcoin) I see no other way than to inform everyone of all transactions, but messages can be of any length. I wouldn't want to download or store the chatlog of everyone on the planet on my pc, simply because it's the only way to ensure delivery once a client connects. The only difference with the idea that I had was that a client might delete messages once it receives an authenticated delete command from the recipient (or perhaps the sender). This may still allow for people to use the system as global backup though.
- cjg 14y agoThe proof of work is proportional to the length of the message, so it is computationally difficult to send such long messages.
- JoachimSchipper 14y agoIt's definitely not.
- cjg 14y agoWould you care to explain why?
- invdevm 14y agoHere's my address for secure messaging: BM-onWV4PZKAr8AGdsoSgCLsLqo8wp3c3DHA
- joelthelion 14y agoCan this be used to implement a decentralized version of twitter? I've been wanting to do this for ages, but it's a difficult technical problem that requires a large investment. This might just be it!
- betterunix 14y agoI seem to be missing the details on the cryptographic constructions here. Can anyone point to the specification i.e. what ciphers, signature systems, etc. are being used, and how they are being used? Also, they seem to be saying that they are secure against passive eavesdroppers. We absolutely must be thinking in terms of active attackers in this day and age.
- kaoD 14y agoCheck the technical paper: https://bitmessage.org/Bitmessage%20Technical%20Paper.pdf https://bitmessage.org/Bitmessage%20Technical%20Paper.pdf