oh, absolutely. I didn't mean to imply it was that simple, or that was enough by itself. Merely, over the systems already in use, wave already has a strong advantage.
~~~ Thomas & Bertines online review show: http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) On 5 December 2013 16:46, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > Thomas, > > There is more to the security, than simply decentralization. > > We had had discussions in the past (on the IRC, not sure if it got to > this list) about how best to encrypt/sign deltas of each user (by > giving each user their own keys) in such a way that the whole wave can > be read/edited by participants in that Wave, but that any > non-participants are actually incapable of decrypting it. > > There is some complex work to happen when you add/remove a participant > to an existing wave though... > > Ali > > On 5 December 2013 15:41, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > "nsa-resistant*" > > > > Thats absolutely a good plus point in this day and age. Its wouldn't be > > "proof" by decentralization but > > certainly makes things more resistant. > > The idea of a federated protocol that lets people selectively share stuff > > with others is going to be harder to spy on (on mass) then a nice > convient > > all-in-one-place Google or Facebook server. > > Don't trust Bobswave server? Then start your own! Then you own have to > > worry about stuff shared with bobswave users ;) > > > > This could be quite a selling point - both to individuals, but also > > to company's worried about trade secrets being lost. > > > > > > ~~~ > > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > > > > On 5 December 2013 16:29, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) > > <sten...@stenyak.com>wrote: > > > >> This can be a good idea, and I agree with the general design and goals > >> of your project. > >> > >> I'm not sure whether this should be a replacement for WiaB, or just a > >> parallel project that can evolve side-by-side, but if you go forward > >> with it, we'd just have to wait and see how users and possible > >> contributors react to it (I'd definitely contribute however I can, be it > >> code, paypal-beers or whatever! :-) > >> > >> Random suggestion: I'd try to direct/promote the project (amongst other > >> people, of course) towards those who want nsa-resistant* and open source > >> whatsapp alternatives. > >> > >> (*) whatever that means... (it can not be worse than current email > >> protocols hehe) > >> > >> On 12/01/13 05:03, Joseph Gentle wrote: > >> > I still really want to make the wave platform we've been talking about > >> > for awhile. I just don't have any time because I need to work to eat. > >> > > >> > So I've spent the last month thinking about running a kickstarter to > >> > fund the work. Christian's email was really timely. > >> > > >> > > >> > I want arbitrary JSON documents, or arbitrary embedding like we talked > >> > about a few months ago. > >> > > >> > I want a protocol based on real P2P algorithms rather than the hacky > >> > mess we have at the moment with trees of servers connecting via an > >> > XMPP extension > >> > > >> > I want the same fundamental protocol to work server-server or > >> > server-client. The OT stuff should work like git. > >> > > >> > No single person can maintain our 500k of legacy java code. I want to > >> > write a better version with much cleaner separation of OT protocol and > >> > application specifics. I still want a web client, but it should be > >> > written in pure javascript. > >> > > >> > Messages should be cryptographically secure from snooping. > >> > > >> > > >> > The way I see it, there's fundamentally three pieces that make up > wave: > >> > > >> > 1. A set of OT primitives which allow peers to generate & interpret > >> operations > >> > 2. A platform on top of (1) for exchanging operations between > networked > >> peers > >> > 3. An application on top of (2) which is trying to replace email > >> > > >> > These pieces should be separate from one another, and usable in other > >> contexts. > >> > > >> > I have a clear idea of how we can make (1) and (2) work. The OT part > >> > we've talked about on the list and I've been slowly prototyping out > >> > here: http://github.com/josephg/tp2stuff > >> > > >> > I have a bunch of applications I want to build on top of a platform > >> > like this. For example, I want my text editor, compiler & unit tests > >> > to all talk to one another so my text editor doesn't need > >> > language-specific completion or syntax checking, and so my friends can > >> > jump in and help me code. > >> > > >> > I don't know what the best way to build (3) is - but I'm more than > >> > happy to build the platform that a new kind of email could be built on > >> > top of. Maybe the current WIAB design is totally fine for that part - > >> > though I want end-to-end encryption. > >> > > >> > I don't know when the right time to do this would be. I don't know if > >> > I should work alone or if we should put a team together (Hi Ali!). If > >> > I were to do this properly it would take about a month of prep to get > >> > a kickstarter together, and if it is successful I'd want to quit my > >> > job to do it. I think it'd take me about 6 months to a year of work to > >> > get a stable, secure platform working (probably closer to a year), and > >> > I'm also not allowed to stay in the US without an employer on my visa. > >> > > >> > The earliest this will probably happen is the end of the year. > >> > > >> > Kickstarter might also not be the right way to fund it. Cryptocat was > >> > funded in 2012 mostly by Radio Free Asia's Open Tech Fund[1] to the > >> > tune of ~$100k. A kickstarter would give us users (great) and > >> > publicity, but the right private sponsor might also work. > >> > > >> > Maybe the most contentious part of all, I don't think I'd want to call > >> > it wave. But it really would be the grandchild of what we've been > >> > working on all this time. > >> > > >> > Thats my thoughts. If anyone has any ideas, I'm all ears. As I say, > >> > I'm keen to build this, but I'm too old to live on ramen in a granny > >> > shack. This thing we've been working toward has real value, and could > >> > be put to great effect if we can actually make it good. > >> > > >> > -J > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > [1] https://crypto.cat/documents/report-1213.pdf > >> https://www.opentechfund.org/ > >> > >> >
