On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 10:16:22PM -0700, Erik Anderson wrote:
> " at the end (this is
> ). I'm guessing that it
> is
> thought that no one would notice these unless they were looking for them.
Surely you mean
?
Because after a quick look it's clear that is the '0'
and a '1', so that my v
Well, looking at the spec that was linked earlier in this thread...
When someone is using a TPV that can do OTR (and the user has indicated a
willingness to use it), then many(all?) their chats
will have "
" at the end (this
is
).
I'm guessing that it is thought that no one would notice these
Nevermind, I should have read the rest of the thread first.
Looks like a pretty solid protocol.
Does anyone know if it is possible for an arbitrary TPV
to start an OTR with another TPV? If so, how? Or is it
needed to be recognized by the other viewer as being
a viewer that has OTR implemented?
Ho
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 01:59:49PM -0700, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> Has anyone spent time looking at the encrypted chat feature included in some
> third-party viewers? It's my understanding that this contacts third-party
> servers in obtaining and validating keys. Is that correct?
If that is correc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/25/2010 5:44 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> The changes we've requested primarily concern the re-establishment of
> trust between the Emerald development team, Linden Lab, and the Second
> Life resident community. If you believe that yo
On 2010-08-25 20:02, Kadah wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 8/25/2010 3:11 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
>>On 2010-08-25 17:14, Kadah wrote:
>>>Do they get
>>> special (more restrictive?) rules than other TPVs just because its popular?
>> No.
> Good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/25/2010 3:11 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> On 2010-08-25 17:14, Kadah wrote:
>> Do they get
>> special (more restrictive?) rules than other TPVs just because its popular?
> No.
Good to know, Oz. Thanks.
Will we get to know what the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I would expect that it being more popular just puts more eyes on it.
On 25/8/2010 19:11, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> On 2010-08-25 17:14, Kadah wrote:
>> Do they get
>> special (more restrictive?) rules than other TPVs just because its p
On 2010-08-25 17:14, Kadah wrote:
> Do they get
> special (more restrictive?) rules than other TPVs just because its popular?
No.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read th
On 8/25/10, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> Has anyone spent time looking at the encrypted chat feature included in some
> third-party viewers? It's my understanding that this contacts third-party
> servers in obtaining and validating keys. Is that correct? If so, do these
> connections share any informa
Some of the TPVs implement the OTR protocol for encrypted messaging:
http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/Protocol-v2-3.1.0.html
This does not involve 3rd party servers, or disclose information. In fact
it's designed not to disclose anything,
___
Policies and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/25/2010 1:59 PM, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> Has anyone spent time looking at the encrypted chat feature included in
> some third-party viewers? It's my understanding that this contacts
> third-party servers in obtaining and validating keys. Is that
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> Has anyone spent time looking at the encrypted chat feature included in some
> third-party viewers?
you mean like THAT VIEWERs OTR feature??
1 its badly broken anyway
2 it does not have a keyserver all keys are current session only (even
t
13 matches
Mail list logo
