On 01/02/2021 20:56, Lee Clagett wrote:
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Sunday, January 31, 2021 7:28 PM, David Barrett
wrote:
GCM?
SIDH?
I haven't read much of this thread.
The main reason for the use of a symmetric cipher is necessary resource
conservation.
Peter Fairbrother
Black-box solutions Vs P2P people power is a boring old conundrum.
https://cryptome.org/jdb/ap.htm
By "classical" thinking, "Assassination Politics" would have to be the best,
tightest-security, more protected organization that has ever existed on the
face of this planet. Just about EVERY
>> It's really a lot of work to look up information to back up every
>> single point I make.
>
> A lot of work? Finding one reddit link?
> I would never make such assumption. It's a perfect example of a 'non
> sequitur'. It doesn't follow that X being easy means X is being done.
Thanks for all the great comments! Combining the responses:
I asssume when talking about design proposals, for secure comms, that
> always Android and iOS devices are used. Are people aware when using such
> devices, about zero-click exploits, from Pegasus (NSO Group, or
> FinFisher/FinSpy? I
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, January 29, 2021 2:42 PM, David Barrett
wrote:
> Wow, these are (mostly) great responses, and exactly what I was looking for.
> Thank you! To call out a couple responses:
>
> > 6, the ratchet protocol produces a hash of previous messages that
>> Re Signal and Javascript, Signal offers its code in a signed binary, and
>>> offers the source to that binary for anybody to build and check.
>>
>> Signal offers source, but given that it's distributing binaries via app
>> stores, there's really no way to guarantee that the binary matches that
On 1/29/21, David Barrett wrote:
> Wow, these are (mostly) great responses, and exactly what I was looking
> for. Thank you! To call out a couple responses:
>
> 6, the ratchet protocol produces a hash of previous messages that provides
>> for detection of dropped data, among many other things.
On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 7:56 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
>
> On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 12:57:43 +0100
> Stefan Claas wrote:
>
>
> > What I miss in all those discussion is, when it comes to secure mobile
> > comms,
> > the usage and promotion of mobile devices running on OpenSource OS devices,
>
On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 4:29 AM David Barrett wrote:
>
> Hey all, I took the liberty of writing up this proposal and everything I've
> learned in more detail here:
>
> https://gist.github.com/quinthar/44e1c4f63f84556a9822ebf274dc510a
Hi all,
I just skimmed through the whole thread and have one
Hey all, I took the liberty of writing up this proposal and everything I've
learned in more detail here:
https://gist.github.com/quinthar/44e1c4f63f84556a9822ebf274dc510a
I'd really welcome any feedback or (constructive) criticism on it. Thanks!
-david
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 11:42 AM David
Wow, these are (mostly) great responses, and exactly what I was looking
for. Thank you! To call out a couple responses:
6, the ratchet protocol produces a hash of previous messages that provides
> for detection of dropped data, among many other things. pgp does not do
> this.
It feels like
Could you summarise this for me, please? It is too long and upsetting to read.
I don't think an ability to form words that alone sound like a good
argument in response to an ignored point, makes those good words have
meaning when said.
On 1/28/21, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan
On 2021-01-26 04:31, David Barrett wrote:
> Yes, this does assume a central keyserver -- and I agree, it's possible
> that it lies to you, establishing a connection with someone other than who
> you requested (or even a man-in-the-middle). I don't know how to really
> solve that for real without
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:43:45AM -0800, David Barrett wrote:
> Incidentally, for anyone following along, here's a great thread I had on
> Twitter regarding this:
>
> https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1353768706141163520
For those of us unwilling to support Satanists, please paste in a copy
On 1/25/21, David Barrett wrote:
> Incidentally, for anyone following along, here's a great thread I had on
> Twitter regarding this:
>
> https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1353768706141163520
>
> My current summary of Signal's primary design goal is:
>
>> Perhaps I'm looking at it the wrong
Incidentally, for anyone following along, here's a great thread I had on
Twitter regarding this:
https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1353768706141163520
My current summary of Signal's primary design goal is:
> Perhaps I'm looking at it the wrong way. Signal's primary design goal
seems to be to
On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 9:15 PM wrote:
> > 1) This is perhaps an obvious question (I've got to start somewhere,
> after
> > all), but what is the downside of the simplest possible solution, which I
> > think would be for all participants to publish a public key to some
> common
> > key server,
Thanks for the suggestion! Yes, I'm not really asking about politics, just
about technology.
David
On Sun, Jan 24, 2021, 1:35 PM professor rat wrote:
> I clicked the URL in your first email - the second one worked - as did a
> Google search.
>
> So, onto your query - I understand " Coderpunks
I clicked the URL in your first email - the second one worked - as did a Google
search.
So, onto your query - I understand " Coderpunks " answers the more technical
questions.
Have you tried them?
My knowledge of Signal is colored by my impression that Moxie Marlinspike can't
be trusted.
He
This site can’t provide a secure connection
expensify.cash. uses an unsupported protocol.
ERR_SSL_VERSION_OR_CIPHER_MISMATCH
Unsupported protocol
The client and server don't support a common SSL protocol version or cipher
suite.
20 matches
Mail list logo
