7 ms·

How does signing a message make it any less (or more) ephemeral? You either store the copy or you don't (and Google does). I don't see how a signature could inf

How does signing a message make it any less (or more) ephemeral? You either store the copy or you don't (and Google does). I don't see how a signature could influence that.

xnyhps 13y ago
There's a difference between Google "knowing" you sent a message and third parties being able to verify that you sent a specific message. Whether Google stores your message when you turn on "Off-the-Record" is of course something we can never know. But if your contact says you said "X", and you say you never said "X", Google could still prove you said "X" at some point. That does not fit the idea of "Off-the-Record".
computer 13y ago
It makes it possible to prove that someone didn't forge a chatlog, but that you really said X at some point based on your friend's chat logs.
- endianswap 13y ago
  How is it any more possible to prove a chatlog wasn't forged, given that third-parties cannot verify these signatures (only Google can, if TFA is correct) and Google already keeps unlimited retention of their chat logs and thus could do the verification without any signature field? Plus, not all clients cause a signature to be inserted, so even the lack of a signature wouldn't imply forgery.
  - vilhelm_s 13y ago
    Do Google really save a secret copy of your chatlog if you select the "off the record" option to disable logging? I would find that surprising.
  - VLM 13y ago
    "(only Google can, if TFA is correct)" The article and/or its interpretation is wrong about that because the algo is unknown. Even worse, human beings both currently and formerly employed by GOOG know the secret-ish algo, and those humans are not necessarily still employed there, nor are they incapable of communication. So its very unclear who knows how that algo works other than GOOG as an absolute minimum. A correct statement would be, at the minimum at least GOOG knows how to make those hashes, and at this instant who knows how many other people or orgs who may or may not be in support or opposition to you.

How does signing a message make it any less (or more) ephemeral? You either store the copy or you don't (and Google does). I don't see how a signature could influence that.

xnyhps 13y ago

There's a difference between Google "knowing" you sent a message and third parties being able to verify that you sent a specific message. Whether Google stores your message when you turn on "Off-the-Record" is of course something we can never know. But if your contact says you said "X", and you say you never said "X", Google could still prove you said "X" at some point. That does not fit the idea of "Off-the-Record".

computer 13y ago

It makes it possible to prove that someone didn't forge a chatlog, but that you really said X at some point based on your friend's chat logs.

endianswap 13y ago
How is it any more possible to prove a chatlog wasn't forged, given that third-parties cannot verify these signatures (only Google can, if TFA is correct) and Google already keeps unlimited retention of their chat logs and thus could do the verification without any signature field? Plus, not all clients cause a signature to be inserted, so even the lack of a signature wouldn't imply forgery.
- vilhelm_s 13y ago
  Do Google really save a secret copy of your chatlog if you select the "off the record" option to disable logging? I would find that surprising.
- VLM 13y ago
  "(only Google can, if TFA is correct)" The article and/or its interpretation is wrong about that because the algo is unknown. Even worse, human beings both currently and formerly employed by GOOG know the secret-ish algo, and those humans are not necessarily still employed there, nor are they incapable of communication. So its very unclear who knows how that algo works other than GOOG as an absolute minimum. A correct statement would be, at the minimum at least GOOG knows how to make those hashes, and at this instant who knows how many other people or orgs who may or may not be in support or opposition to you.