3 ms·

I am very interested in developing an iOS client for this. We are developing a pluggable framework for Tor integration on iOS called OnionKit [1] based off of O

I am very interested in developing an iOS client for this. We are developing a pluggable framework for Tor integration on iOS called OnionKit [1] based off of Onion Browser for the ChatSecure project [2], the only open source OTR compatible chat client for that platform. It's in pretty rough shape right now because we got stuck trying to figure out how to make Apple's Networking APIs honor the proxy settings on TCP connections, so please contact us if you can help solve this problem. Since it doesn't involve the transfer of money or copyrighted material, it shouldn't yet be rejected by Apple's reviewers as the BitTorrent and BitCoin protocol have been. Skype is still allowed, and that technically is (or used to be?) a peer to peer communications system. Unfortunately, you aren't presently allowed by Apple to run a background socket on iOS for longer than 10 minutes unless it is a full VoIP application, so you would never be able to use it for push-style communication, without compromising a user's anonymity via a web backend that stores your APNS token (device specific messaging token for iOS devices). [1] https://github.com/ChatSecure/OnionKit https://github.com/ChatSecure/OnionKit [2] https://chatsecure.org https://chatsecure.org

jamoes 13y ago
Jeesh, why are people still putting up with Apple's domineering control over what they're allowed to do with their own devices? I know none of what you said is new news, but seeing it all come together like that really highlights the problem with Apple's policies. IMO, a much more useful app to build would be an HTML5 Bitmessage app that users can just run in their browser (similar to the blockchain.info/wallet app for bitcoin). This would make the technology accessible to a much larger group of people.
- czhiddy 13y ago
  > Jeesh, why are people still putting up with Apple's domineering control over what they're allowed to do with their own devices? Because when the average user hits a badly written app that constantly uses the network in the background and kills the battery in 2 hours, they're not gonna go sift through logs to see what's taking the power assertions.
  - laumars 13y ago
    Except that could still happen on iOS and has nothing to do with the complaint about Apples strict policies. Plus it also makes the false assumption that users have to sift through logs on platforms that aren't as strict with the apps they allow into their market place.
- chrisballinger 13y ago
  I think the ultimate human cost of not providing free native, easy-to-use cryptographically secure communications apps on iOS is worse than the ideological battle against Apple's idiotic walled garden. It's not just a threat against activists under oppressive regimes, it's a matter of "national security". Centralized chat services like WeChat [1] (developed by by Tencent in China) or WhatsApp [2] get more popular, the governments of the world will be able to intercept all private communication on a large scale. Although to be fair, privacy has been effectively dead pretty much worldwide for a while now. [1] http://www.scmp.com/comment/blogs/article/1083025/hu-jia-explains-why-mobile-apps-make-activism-spooky http://www.scmp.com/comment/blogs/article/1083025/hu-jia-exp... [2] http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/27897/can-an-employer-access-whatsapp-messages-if-you-are-using-their-servers http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/27897/can-an-emp...
  - droopyEyelids 13y ago
    Beautifully put. I too, see the ideological cost of patronizing Apple's closed system. But there is another fee levied when the most popular set of devices in our country allows unlimited snooping of the people's data.

jamoes 13y ago

Jeesh, why are people still putting up with Apple's domineering control over what they're allowed to do with their own devices? I know none of what you said is new news, but seeing it all come together like that really highlights the problem with Apple's policies. IMO, a much more useful app to build would be an HTML5 Bitmessage app that users can just run in their browser (similar to the blockchain.info/wallet app for bitcoin). This would make the technology accessible to a much larger group of people.

czhiddy 13y ago
> Jeesh, why are people still putting up with Apple's domineering control over what they're allowed to do with their own devices? Because when the average user hits a badly written app that constantly uses the network in the background and kills the battery in 2 hours, they're not gonna go sift through logs to see what's taking the power assertions.
- laumars 13y ago
  Except that could still happen on iOS and has nothing to do with the complaint about Apples strict policies. Plus it also makes the false assumption that users have to sift through logs on platforms that aren't as strict with the apps they allow into their market place.
chrisballinger 13y ago
I think the ultimate human cost of not providing free native, easy-to-use cryptographically secure communications apps on iOS is worse than the ideological battle against Apple's idiotic walled garden. It's not just a threat against activists under oppressive regimes, it's a matter of "national security". Centralized chat services like WeChat [1] (developed by by Tencent in China) or WhatsApp [2] get more popular, the governments of the world will be able to intercept all private communication on a large scale. Although to be fair, privacy has been effectively dead pretty much worldwide for a while now. [1] http://www.scmp.com/comment/blogs/article/1083025/hu-jia-explains-why-mobile-apps-make-activism-spooky http://www.scmp.com/comment/blogs/article/1083025/hu-jia-exp... [2] http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/27897/can-an-employer-access-whatsapp-messages-if-you-are-using-their-servers http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/27897/can-an-emp...
- droopyEyelids 13y ago
  Beautifully put. I too, see the ideological cost of patronizing Apple's closed system. But there is another fee levied when the most popular set of devices in our country allows unlimited snooping of the people's data.