22
P2P E2EE messaging and file-transfer (positive-intentions.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/26803468

https://positive-intentions.com/

A webapp for P2P E2EE messaging and file transfer. its a fairly unique approach to secure messaging.

the project isnt ready to replace any existing apps or services, but given the competative market for this kind of project, id like to push it out to get feedback.

i made an attempt to create documentation on the website, but otherwise feel free to reach out with questions about how it works.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 years ago (5 children)

if youre asking for an audit, i expect you have an idea that they arent cheap. its simply beyond my means. the project is too complicated for pro-bono work.

the chat app (which contains file-transfer capabilities) is open source. id like to develop the p2p capabilities into a SaaS and so its logical to lean towards close-source for the "file" app.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I can definitely respect your desire to build something that can support you and I wish you luck. It's a cool concept and I really like the idea for it. I'm definitely not your target audience as I'm not interested in closed platforms after experiencing enough rug pulls, nor am I interested in privacy-focused applications that aren't completely open source under a strong copyleft license with reproducible builds. I suspect that many in the privacy community feel the same way. However, if your tool makes it easy for Alice to send Bob (neither of whom have ever used your service) a 300 GB file and do video calling/screen sharing without hassle then I imagine you'll have some users.

    EDIT: I see in that reddit thread that you haven't found being open source to be much of a draw. That makes sense to me. At this point, I don't view being open source as a positive, I view it as basic table stakes. Being open source with a strong copyleft license and a DCO instead of a CLA to prevent relicensing approaches being featureful to me. It's unfortunate how many projects use a CLA with copyright transfer. Signal fails in this regard, for example. It may be possible for Whisper to relicense future releases to something that is not truly free.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    thanks for your reply.

    can i do both? the chat app is completely open source. thats the thing i wanted to get traction on, but it doesnt seem to be working. which is understandable with things like bugs and audits missing.

    so for a new approach with "file" i'm creating an app that is simplified to being purely for file transfer. i hope this simplication can also lead to more stable functionality to hopefully get to a level where it can send 300gb over webrtc. id like to this approach to remain close source so that i can create something competative in the market for file-transfer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    No. No one is conscious of the CS to OS true consideration. Everyone listens to the writers address the public image. IDGAF about your image not being censored. That's nice but I still won't consider anyone's word as worth anything but as damn near fraudulent and generously as a demonstration of a skill of consideration. Doesn't matter because at the end of the day they're PR reps, not journalists.

    Journalism is printing something that someone does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.

    • George Orwell

    CS is nothing more than taking one person's word, someone most just don't know anyway at best, for the doings which said person claims to be done.

    Whatever. At the end of the day it's not your computer anymore. It's theirs. It does what they tell it to do, not you.

    Your absolute best bet is, assuming you're not actually writing it yourself and let's even give that you don't even know how to read let alone write software instructions, to run Open Source Software instructions. If you understand the human rights and respect involved and give a shit to care for the writers and their work, then you will be as adamant as you may to FREE and Open Source Software.

    This be cause I'll take the desperation to be done by masses for the masses over someone I don't care to measure likelihood of, of lacking exploitative opportunity of the masses, when those who code the internet blatantly are doing just that to the masses and not even pretending not to. Yeah, it really is that bad. Given any opportunity, I, and anyone else with practical logic, will just chose to act as if you are another exploitative cracker abusing anyone foolish enough to be a user of your closed source anything. Not because I think that that is who you are.

    That because I care not to gamble at all, ever. Thanks, but no thanks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent