Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Darius Kazemi

But also, in response to all the "what about e2e encryption" -- I would like that but I would *also* like a nice dedicated user interface for my activitypub DMs as they exist today. Would a custom client be more secure than my current DMs? no. would it be LESS secure? also no!

16 comments
Glyph

@darius you could also have explicit support for bootstrapping into more secure messengers if you were doing this as a first-class thing. a lot of people (myself included) _mostly_ use social DMs as a way of getting off-platform onto Signal or similar

Darius Kazemi

Further (and now I am ranting, sorry), I used email as an analogy specifically because it is insecure as shit but we use it every day

Darius Kazemi

I probably should have pitched it in the original post as an idea for insecure messaging

Chris Radcliff

@darius Yeah. I’m in favor of a better UX. I’m even more in favor of fixing the glaring safety hole before encouraging new adoption. I’m a thoughtful server admin, but even I don’t trust me with your DMs. (And yes, I totally had the “I read your emails” sticker back in the day.)

infinite love ⴳ

@darius i'm not sure what the point of such a *server* would be, but as a *client*, i imagine it would make some sense. i'm thinking generic activitypub server and then an activitypub client that just shows you your inbox. i mean, everything is a "direct message" on the spec level, right? just, you're dealing indirectly with resources. perhaps you could have a separate Message activity, but it is also conceivable to add certain objects to a certain collection. maybe even both of these ideas.

Misty

@darius See, I half thought this was nerd sniping to attract replies about security

Darius Kazemi

@misty lol no I'm just a dumbass who forgot where I was posting

Glyph

@darius FWIW email is a lot more secure, on average, than people give it credit for. It doesn't break in the nice clean way that e.g. spoofed TLS would, but in practice if you try to blast out plaintext SMTP forged from: headers these days, you get blackholed into oblivion 99% of the time. servers are also using TLS between each other and so grabbing messages off the wire is not trivial either.

Darius Kazemi

@glyph right, and ActivityPub has similar protections built in for forged from fields and the like. The core insecurity of "Google can hand your plaintext email to the cops" is analogous to "admins can read your DMs" that people on here are always bringing up

Jason Petersen (he)

@darius @glyph how is all of this that you’ve described not jus Matrix. Yes, it’s not activity pub. But it’s mostly what you mean, and it’s federated.

Darius Kazemi

@jason @glyph it is frustrating to ask "has anyone built a bridge out of paper?" and to get a bunch of replies about how plenty of bridges are built from steel

Gracious Anthracite

@darius

My main thought with regards to "are fediverse DMs at all secure" was that the kind of people who seem to be interested in building IM clients always seem to be super into making it secure, and thus would probably prefer to go off and make a client for a more secure federated protocol, or make their own protocol because surely what the world needs is a 47th IM protocol that makes a slightly different set of choices than the preceding 46 that nobody's using. :ds_wink:

Getting all chat, public or private, on the same publicly-owned protocol is not a bad aim in and of itself. I just feel like "omg NO PRIVACY" is a thing everyone who makes these types of clients is going to be screaming about.

@darius

My main thought with regards to "are fediverse DMs at all secure" was that the kind of people who seem to be interested in building IM clients always seem to be super into making it secure, and thus would probably prefer to go off and make a client for a more secure federated protocol, or make their own protocol because surely what the world needs is a 47th IM protocol that makes a slightly different set of choices than the preceding 46 that nobody's using. :ds_wink:

Go Up