3 ms·

I would love to hear Moxie's thoughts on Bleep and whether he thinks this is secure or not...

• JshWright 11y ago
  Unless they have published their source code (or at least a protocol spec), then I don't think there's much in the way of 'thoughts' to be had.
• dmix 11y ago
  Two benefits over TextSecure that I can see: - Doesn't require your mobile phone number to use it - Not dependant on google services on Android Downsides: - Cant beat Textsecures crypto - Not opensource The last two points make this a no-go for me.
  • higherpurpose 11y ago
    Another benefit is that it's P2P, which doesn't do much in terms of privacy (although Bleep's website claims that it does somehow...) but it can help with censorship - think Turkey, Iran bans of apps and services. I think even Brazil wanted to ban Whatsapp at some point. I wouldn't consider it a top 5 priority right now, but I do hope OWS takes into consideration making Signal P2P as well in the future (perhaps with some new technologies that may appear or mature by then). My own priorities for what I want to see in Signal/Textsecure next: 1) integrated Android app 2) desktop client (ideally web/browser-based, but if that's not too secure, I could live with a native app, too, maybe one that works only through Windows 10's store for the sandbox security and digital signing benefit, as well as for the new auth features) 3) video-chat support
    • dmix 11y ago
      Re #2: TextSecure has a web/chrome extension version in development: https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure-Browser https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure-Browser