Tox.im

["Łukasz \"Cyber Killer\" Korpalski"]

W dniu 07.07.2014 16:55, rysiek pisze:
> Dnia poniedziałek, 7 lipca 2014 16:06:47 Dāvis Mosāns pisze:
>> I don't agree, I think XMPP could be good solution, while yes attack
>> surface is quite large but it will be in any case, because even if you
>> create the very minimalist chat protocol possible (let's say basically use
>> asymmetric cryptography for messages which are plaintext without any
>> features) you still can have bugs in cryptography library, network stack,
>> OS/kernel. This part will be same no matter what messaging protocol you
>> use.
> 
> Exactly. And that's an argument for NOT minimizing the attack surface beyond 
> these problems... how exactly?
> 
> I mean, your argument is basically: "don't wash your hands, as there might be 
> salmonella in the eggs anyway". Dafuq?
> 

I'm going to defend XMPP too, but on the grounds that it's an already
established and widely used protocol, the overhead is minimal looking
from a modern point of view (even when not using the potentially
privacy-risky elements) and it was designed to be extendable. These are
imo good arguments to use xmpp instead of creating something new (again
:-P ).

-- 
Łukasz "Cyber Killer" Korpalski

mail: cyberkiller8 at gmail.com
xmpp: cyber_killer at jabster.pl
site: http://website.cybkil.cu.cc
gpgkey: 0x72511999 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net

//When replying to my e-mail, kindly please
//write your message below the quoted text.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20140708/edf9bca3/attachment-0001.sig>