4 ms·

If this is true and has no strings (backdoors) attached this is huge. This means end-to-end encryption for messages from more than half a billion people and an

If this is true and has no strings (backdoors) attached this is huge. This means end-to-end encryption for messages from more than half a billion people and an incredible privacy win compared to SMS usage. Brought to you by facebook.

AlyssaRowan 12y ago
I do not think there are likely to be backdoors: Moxie just wouldn't allow it without walking away and saying something loudly. He is not on the NSA's Christmas list. :)
- edwintorok 12y ago
  If the application isn't open-source how can he check though? They can show a version without the backdoor to him and build the binary with the backdoor. Or there could be vulnerabilities elsewhere (not in Moxie's) code. I don't think you can claim no backdoors unless you have the full application under your control, and have it audited.
- nly 12y ago
  Trusting one person simply because they're cool, with the privacy of 600M users, is pretty foolish. Even if everything you say is true, and Moxie signs off on the implementation, nothing prevents men in black suits turning up the day he leaves and suggesting they introduce a subtle bug.
  - balladeer 12y ago
    Agreed. This fanboy kinda trust and reliance can be very damaging.
zanny 12y ago
Meanwhile, XMPP OTR and SRTP on SIP have been around for a decade. Too bad half a billion people are using a proprietary non-ineroperable chat mechanism with no idea what WhatsApp is logging and with no assurance of the continued availability of the service. WhatsApp, Hangouts, Skype, etc are all cancer on interpersonal communications by trying to make it a profit center. They destroy user freedom, they severely limit communication, and they do it while making you think its worth your money when you could host your own XMPP server and delegate with an entire network of chat servers. And no, I do not mean your grandmother should host an XMPP server. Facebook gets props for using XMPP in its messaging implementation, even if they crippled it by not letting users message outside Facebooks network.
- darklajid 12y ago
  Disclaimer: I'm hosting my own 'friends and family' XMPP server, XMPP clients are the only mobile IM apps I use. In the shelf next to me I have an outdated 'Programming Jabber' book. I want XMPP to be the solution. If I compare the XMPP feature set with what people around me are doing with WhatsApp though.. - Without optional features (stream resumption?) you have flaky connections/lose messages, even today - people tend to use WhatsApp etc to send inline media, be it pictures or videos. How would you do that with XMPP, without controlling the client (I run pidgin. Might be on bitlbee?). - Having more than one device? Tablet and phone? You probably now want carbons (works reasonably well with some rough edges, but some clients don't support them) and likely would like to see your message history on both clients (-> a shared archive). If the last point, security issues notwithstanding, makes sense/seems plausible, XMPP doesn't seem to offer a decent solution right now. MAM [1] seems to be the answer, but is experimental and .. well - there's no support for it yet. Yes, I would love to see a world in which XMPP succeeds. But right now it's not practical as far as I can tell. 1: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html

AlyssaRowan 12y ago

I do not think there are likely to be backdoors: Moxie just wouldn't allow it without walking away and saying something loudly. He is not on the NSA's Christmas list. :)

edwintorok 12y ago
If the application isn't open-source how can he check though? They can show a version without the backdoor to him and build the binary with the backdoor. Or there could be vulnerabilities elsewhere (not in Moxie's) code. I don't think you can claim no backdoors unless you have the full application under your control, and have it audited.
nly 12y ago
Trusting one person simply because they're cool, with the privacy of 600M users, is pretty foolish. Even if everything you say is true, and Moxie signs off on the implementation, nothing prevents men in black suits turning up the day he leaves and suggesting they introduce a subtle bug.
- balladeer 12y ago
  Agreed. This fanboy kinda trust and reliance can be very damaging.

zanny 12y ago

Meanwhile, XMPP OTR and SRTP on SIP have been around for a decade. Too bad half a billion people are using a proprietary non-ineroperable chat mechanism with no idea what WhatsApp is logging and with no assurance of the continued availability of the service. WhatsApp, Hangouts, Skype, etc are all cancer on interpersonal communications by trying to make it a profit center. They destroy user freedom, they severely limit communication, and they do it while making you think its worth your money when you could host your own XMPP server and delegate with an entire network of chat servers. And no, I do not mean your grandmother should host an XMPP server. Facebook gets props for using XMPP in its messaging implementation, even if they crippled it by not letting users message outside Facebooks network.

darklajid 12y ago
Disclaimer: I'm hosting my own 'friends and family' XMPP server, XMPP clients are the only mobile IM apps I use. In the shelf next to me I have an outdated 'Programming Jabber' book. I want XMPP to be the solution. If I compare the XMPP feature set with what people around me are doing with WhatsApp though.. - Without optional features (stream resumption?) you have flaky connections/lose messages, even today - people tend to use WhatsApp etc to send inline media, be it pictures or videos. How would you do that with XMPP, without controlling the client (I run pidgin. Might be on bitlbee?). - Having more than one device? Tablet and phone? You probably now want carbons (works reasonably well with some rough edges, but some clients don't support them) and likely would like to see your message history on both clients (-> a shared archive). If the last point, security issues notwithstanding, makes sense/seems plausible, XMPP doesn't seem to offer a decent solution right now. MAM [1] seems to be the answer, but is experimental and .. well - there's no support for it yet. Yes, I would love to see a world in which XMPP succeeds. But right now it's not practical as far as I can tell. 1: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0313.html