Well, centralized routing and US government investment shouldn't change the math of the security itself. So long as the design is secure, that shouldn't really matter.

Regardless, can you see any flaw in my reasoning regarding the signal protocol's advantage over simple public key encryption? Thank you!

David

On Sun, Jan 24, 2021, 1:53 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 13:02:24 -0800
David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:

> Signal  protocol ...on the surface it seems _really_ complicated in order to
> protect against only a very narrow range of attacks.
>


        that is my impression as well. On the other hand signal has very serious propblems like requiring people to link their 'identity' to a retarphone and the fact that all messages are routed through signal-NSA servers. I.e. signal is fully centralized.


        you have to take into account that 'moxie' got 3 millions from the US govt. And a lot more from some other silicon valley oligarch.