It looks that SGX solves a problem that p2p can't. How do the alternatives proposed address this? Or they exclude the features?
Here's my most recent article taking a look at SGX and @signalapp
https://t.co/MlDUn7K876
Let me know your thoug… https://t.co/hc3cFAWVbQhttps://twitter.com/Maniacbolts/status/1280009120423141377?s=20 On Twitter
Reactions
-
Manny -
Manny yeah it is really hard. privacy in general, at least online, is something the majority of people still can't understand. its so weird. i am all for removing as much centrality as possible. i think we'll see this happen over time too.
-
Jj Agree 💯 on both. Best argument I have for privacy awareness is that you're privileged if you aren't worrying about it. That privilege can disappear and show countries examples. Central servers problem may evolve better if the heart is on the right place, I trust signal's is
-
Jj IM education is hard. I've tried for too long with little to no success. But the SGX problem seems orthogonal. It Sounds like a cryptographically fancy central server. Even with education the technical problems remain.
-
Manny thats one way to look at it. I consider myself much more privileged that those who REALLY need it, but still, we are all vulnerable to some degree. Signal is good, but i dont think they'll ever proactively take privacy/anon to the NEXT level. They want mass adoption
Reply or react to this post via Webmentions or reply or like to the Mastodon, Twitter or Instagram post.
like contact discovery? yeah, well I believe that is indeed a tough problem to solve. How do you get friends/family to ditch insecure messaging apps that ask and collect lots of personal information? Education is one way, but it's a slow burner. Not all those apps are p2p too.