▲ 613 ▼ Federated End-to-End Encrypted Messaging is Coming Soon (wedistribute.org) submitted 7 months ago by deadsuperhero@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world 93 comments fedilink hide all child comments Important progress has been made regarding bringing MLS end-to-end encryption to the ActivityPub protocol, with developers already building implementations and providing feedback to a future version of the protocol spec.
[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (9 children) Why? What benefit does this have over Signal/Matrix? The article just says "improvements". permalink fedilink source hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 11 points 7 months ago (4 children) why? because it would be cool if only intended recipients are able to view sent messages. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (3 children) That's not really going to be the case if you're using a website instead of an audited app like signal/matrix. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 10 points 7 months ago (2 children) that argument doesn't hold. you're letting perfect be the enemy of good-and if you truly believe that, then you wouldn't be recommending Matrix which has web clients, see https://app.element.io/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child) Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS and reading your messages. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 4 points 7 months ago Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS That doesn't preclude fediverse clients from enabling E2EE. A web-client isn't a requirement. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. Agreed, nobody should trust twitter, but I would trust most mastodon clients to send encrypted messages, if/when implemented correctly. Does it guarantee that messages will never be read? No, but it does an extra layer that wasn't there before. permalink fedilink source parent [–] knova@infosec.pub 5 points 7 months ago One benefit is that Signal controls all the infrastructure and some people do not like that. Sure, you could also spin up a Matrix home server, but that isn’t an ideal solution for everyone either. Some people want to do messaging via their existing ActivityPub infrastructure and that’s OK. permalink fedilink source parent [–] chocrates@piefed.world 5 points 7 months ago from what i can tell, mls supports much larger group chats (50k users) whereas i assume signal would struggle. my chat of 10 people i signal seems just as secure, if i am reading right. permalink fedilink source parent [–] deadsuperhero@lemmy.world [S] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child) So, I used messaging here in the broad sense. One possible application for it is instant messaging, which there are ActivityPub implementations out there doing that. But it can also be used for statuses or pretty much anything else that gets federated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago That actually sounds cool, I wonder if they could support Hidden containers, so the same message can be decypted to different messages by different users. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blah3166@piefed.social 11 points 7 months ago (4 children) why? because it would be cool if only intended recipients are able to view sent messages. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (3 children) That's not really going to be the case if you're using a website instead of an audited app like signal/matrix. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 10 points 7 months ago (2 children) that argument doesn't hold. you're letting perfect be the enemy of good-and if you truly believe that, then you wouldn't be recommending Matrix which has web clients, see https://app.element.io/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child) Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS and reading your messages. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 4 points 7 months ago Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS That doesn't preclude fediverse clients from enabling E2EE. A web-client isn't a requirement. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. Agreed, nobody should trust twitter, but I would trust most mastodon clients to send encrypted messages, if/when implemented correctly. Does it guarantee that messages will never be read? No, but it does an extra layer that wasn't there before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (3 children) That's not really going to be the case if you're using a website instead of an audited app like signal/matrix. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 10 points 7 months ago (2 children) that argument doesn't hold. you're letting perfect be the enemy of good-and if you truly believe that, then you wouldn't be recommending Matrix which has web clients, see https://app.element.io/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child) Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS and reading your messages. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 4 points 7 months ago Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS That doesn't preclude fediverse clients from enabling E2EE. A web-client isn't a requirement. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. Agreed, nobody should trust twitter, but I would trust most mastodon clients to send encrypted messages, if/when implemented correctly. Does it guarantee that messages will never be read? No, but it does an extra layer that wasn't there before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blah3166@piefed.social 10 points 7 months ago (2 children) that argument doesn't hold. you're letting perfect be the enemy of good-and if you truly believe that, then you wouldn't be recommending Matrix which has web clients, see https://app.element.io/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child) Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS and reading your messages. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 4 points 7 months ago Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS That doesn't preclude fediverse clients from enabling E2EE. A web-client isn't a requirement. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. Agreed, nobody should trust twitter, but I would trust most mastodon clients to send encrypted messages, if/when implemented correctly. Does it guarantee that messages will never be read? No, but it does an extra layer that wasn't there before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child) Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS and reading your messages. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] blah3166@piefed.social 4 points 7 months ago Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS That doesn't preclude fediverse clients from enabling E2EE. A web-client isn't a requirement. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. Agreed, nobody should trust twitter, but I would trust most mastodon clients to send encrypted messages, if/when implemented correctly. Does it guarantee that messages will never be read? No, but it does an extra layer that wasn't there before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blah3166@piefed.social 4 points 7 months ago Any we client including Matrix webclient is incredibly vulnerable to the server just injecting JS That doesn't preclude fediverse clients from enabling E2EE. A web-client isn't a requirement. Like there is no point of E2E encryption in Twitter, Musk can read your messages if you open them on any device he can execute arbitrary code on. Agreed, nobody should trust twitter, but I would trust most mastodon clients to send encrypted messages, if/when implemented correctly. Does it guarantee that messages will never be read? No, but it does an extra layer that wasn't there before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] knova@infosec.pub 5 points 7 months ago One benefit is that Signal controls all the infrastructure and some people do not like that. Sure, you could also spin up a Matrix home server, but that isn’t an ideal solution for everyone either. Some people want to do messaging via their existing ActivityPub infrastructure and that’s OK. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chocrates@piefed.world 5 points 7 months ago from what i can tell, mls supports much larger group chats (50k users) whereas i assume signal would struggle. my chat of 10 people i signal seems just as secure, if i am reading right. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deadsuperhero@lemmy.world [S] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child) So, I used messaging here in the broad sense. One possible application for it is instant messaging, which there are ActivityPub implementations out there doing that. But it can also be used for statuses or pretty much anything else that gets federated. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago That actually sounds cool, I wonder if they could support Hidden containers, so the same message can be decypted to different messages by different users. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago That actually sounds cool, I wonder if they could support Hidden containers, so the same message can be decypted to different messages by different users. permalink fedilink source parent