On Thu, Apr 16, 2015, at 12:06 PM, Yaron Goland wrote: > What I really mean is are we going to have an email like experience or a > Tor like experience? > > Email - The user has to pick an email provider, establish a relationship > with them and then they can get email (even for free, of course nothing > is more expensive (in terms of privacy at least) than "free"). > > Tor - Turn on Tor Onion Proxy - GO! No relationship. No exchange of funds > (although I happily donate each year!). Just go. > > I don't know what I don't know so I'm asking if the infrastructure exists > to provide a Tor like experience with XMPP/Zerobin or if it's more of an > Email like experience.
It is actually a bit of a hybrid solution we are thinking of from the user experience side of things. We have a new onboarding experience that you can check out here: https://dev.guardianproject.info/boards/20/topics/264 and a big aspect of it is the "We're finding a place on the internet for you" step. The user only needs to enter a username they desire, and we'll go out and try to connect through a list of XMPP providers who fit our requirements for security and privacy, and setup an account for you automagically. We may offer you some basic preference of what @domain you want, in the way that say Fastmail or Hushmail do, but mostly you can just be *you* and happen to be at some domain, that mostly you don't have to worry about. The work that Hans mentioned we are doing, establishing a standard secure/privacy-by-default stack for XMPP and other services, is part of how we will grow that list of "places on the internet" we trust. Much like Tor, we want a broad network of global volunteers to run these instances, so that there is no single point of failure or risk. Again, if you check out our new onboarding experience, it really is much more of a "Go!" interaction, then a "and now you have to setup an acccount so please fill out these forms!" one. +n > > Does my query at least make sense? > > Thanks, > > Yaron > > ________________________________________ > From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 4:23 PM > To: Yaron Goland; Michael Rogers > Cc: [email protected] >> guardian-dev > Subject: Re: [guardian-dev] zerobin as possible temp store for ChatSecure > iOS > > We're working to make a standard XMPP server platform that is built from > the > ground up for the best privacy. otr.im and jabber.calyxinstitute.org are > two > good examples. So for that standard, something like this zerobin setup > would > be included. It would be good to also have options when your XMPP server > does > not include a zerobin. > > I really hope we don't have to expect that users will set them up > themselves. > > .hc > > Yaron Goland: > > The key issue I'm trying to understand is if the expectation is that one > > can use existing XMPP and ZeroBin providers to enable iOS users to do > > background downloads over HTTPS. Or is this a situation where users are > > expected to set up and run their own servers? > > Thanks, > > Yaron > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: guardian-dev > > <[email protected]> on behalf of > > Michael Rogers <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 1:21 AM > > To: Hans of Guardian > > Cc: [email protected] >> guardian-dev > > Subject: Re: [guardian-dev] zerobin as possible temp store for ChatSecure > > iOS > > > > On 13/04/15 03:59, Hans of Guardian wrote: > >>>> We do have to work out how to protect some of the details, and figure > >>>> out how > >>>> to integrate with various push services like Apple or Google GCM. > >>>> Here's an > >>>> attempt to flush some of that out, based on your outline: > >>>> > >>>> * Phone1 encrypts content with OTR Extra Symmetric Key > >>> > >>> Phone1 could use a fresh key here in order to avoid potentially > >>> encrypting more than one file with the same key. > >> > >> As far as I understand it the OTR TLV8 Extra Symmetric Key is generated > >> per session, but I could be wrong. It has the big advantage of both sides > >> being able to generate it without actually sending it to each other. > > > > But there's only one key per session, right? What happens if you send > > more than one file in a session? > > > >>> How much work is the push message handler allowed to do? Can you, for > >>> example, maintain a separate OTR session for push messages? > >> > >> Hmm, interesting idea. I think that the timeframe might be too slow for > >> OTR, but maybe there could be an axolotl session via the push framework. > >> That sounds a lot more complicated to implement though. TextSecure uses > >> GCM to do all of the message sending, so it should be possible. I don't > >> know about Apple's push though. > > > > Does OTR have time limits? The only reference I can see to time in the > > OTRv3 spec is the configurable time between heartbeat messages. It looks > > like that could be made arbitrarily long if the implementation allows. > > > > On the other hand, OTR requires in-order delivery - I don't know whether > > push messages guarantee that. > > > > Cheers, > > Michael > > > > -- > PGP fingerprint: 5E61 C878 0F86 295C E17D 8677 9F0F E587 374B BE81 > https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x9F0FE587374BBE81 > _______________________________________________ > List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev > To unsubscribe, email: [email protected] -- Nathan of Guardian [email protected] _______________________________________________ List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To unsubscribe, email: [email protected]
