Privacy

32130 readers

346 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Instant Messengers Analysis and Comparison (privacy.awiki.org)

submitted 1 year ago by sir_reginald@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The table is quite big (190+ lines of hand-written HTML) and it doesn't fit on mobile phone screens unless you zoom out. It should be fine on desktop. It also specifies the criteria followed and has analysis of some of the IMs in the table (not close to all of them, I hope to add more analysis in the future).

Counter-arguments are always welcome. Sources and additional information too. Note that the typical privacy recommendation (Signal) is not recommended here. It does not meet our criteria, being centralized and requiring a phone number. I don't want to hate on Signal since it's doing a decent job spreading the importance of E2EE, however we can not recommend it for the given reasons.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Syncing between clients is still possible, although it may not be implemented. There's no reason why a P2P client that's part of a conversation can't request past messages from any other client that's part of that conversation. All P2P does is move the data handling to the edge.

This is what I was implying: if a chat design doesn't account for this, it's IMHO not a good useful design - especially in the case that the design also leaks some metadata, and so isn't 100% targetted at dissidents.

P.s. I'm going to write my own chat application, with blackjack, and hookers.