▲ 2 ▼ FireChat was a tool for revolution. Then it disappeared. (www.fromjason.xyz) submitted 2 years ago by mozz@mbin.grits.dev to c/technology@beehaw.org 13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] 6jarjar6@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 2 years ago (2 children) What about Session, the Signal fork? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] xnx@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) That is meshnet based permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sxan@midwest.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) And? It works on iOS. I'm missing the point. Was it that systems like Briar can't work in iOS because they aren't mesh net? If so, why not choose one that does, like Session? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago For anyone considering Session messenger: The Session developers dropped Perfect Forward Secrecy because it would be hard to work around it. First things first, let’s talk about what we’re leaving behind: Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) and deniability. Source: https://getsession.org/session-protocol-explained In plain English, they dropped a security feature for their convenience to the detriment of their users' security. For anyone unsure what PFS provides: The value of forward secrecy is that it protects past communication. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy The Session devs also claim: Session provides protections against these types of threats in other ways — through fully anonymous account creation, onion routing, and metadata minimisation, for example. Reading between the lines, we can interpret that as introducing security through obscurity, which is generally considered bad practice - https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/656.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] Cube6392@beehaw.org 1 point 2 years ago Session has made some insecure solution surrounding important design elements like forward secrecy permalink fedilink source parent
[–] xnx@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) That is meshnet based permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sxan@midwest.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) And? It works on iOS. I'm missing the point. Was it that systems like Briar can't work in iOS because they aren't mesh net? If so, why not choose one that does, like Session? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago For anyone considering Session messenger: The Session developers dropped Perfect Forward Secrecy because it would be hard to work around it. First things first, let’s talk about what we’re leaving behind: Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) and deniability. Source: https://getsession.org/session-protocol-explained In plain English, they dropped a security feature for their convenience to the detriment of their users' security. For anyone unsure what PFS provides: The value of forward secrecy is that it protects past communication. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy The Session devs also claim: Session provides protections against these types of threats in other ways — through fully anonymous account creation, onion routing, and metadata minimisation, for example. Reading between the lines, we can interpret that as introducing security through obscurity, which is generally considered bad practice - https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/656.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sxan@midwest.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) And? It works on iOS. I'm missing the point. Was it that systems like Briar can't work in iOS because they aren't mesh net? If so, why not choose one that does, like Session? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago For anyone considering Session messenger: The Session developers dropped Perfect Forward Secrecy because it would be hard to work around it. First things first, let’s talk about what we’re leaving behind: Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) and deniability. Source: https://getsession.org/session-protocol-explained In plain English, they dropped a security feature for their convenience to the detriment of their users' security. For anyone unsure what PFS provides: The value of forward secrecy is that it protects past communication. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy The Session devs also claim: Session provides protections against these types of threats in other ways — through fully anonymous account creation, onion routing, and metadata minimisation, for example. Reading between the lines, we can interpret that as introducing security through obscurity, which is generally considered bad practice - https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/656.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago For anyone considering Session messenger: The Session developers dropped Perfect Forward Secrecy because it would be hard to work around it. First things first, let’s talk about what we’re leaving behind: Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) and deniability. Source: https://getsession.org/session-protocol-explained In plain English, they dropped a security feature for their convenience to the detriment of their users' security. For anyone unsure what PFS provides: The value of forward secrecy is that it protects past communication. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy The Session devs also claim: Session provides protections against these types of threats in other ways — through fully anonymous account creation, onion routing, and metadata minimisation, for example. Reading between the lines, we can interpret that as introducing security through obscurity, which is generally considered bad practice - https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/656.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cube6392@beehaw.org 1 point 2 years ago Session has made some insecure solution surrounding important design elements like forward secrecy permalink fedilink source parent