What advantage does Signal protocol have over basic public key encryption?

[Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0]

On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 14:06:51 -0500
Karl <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:

> > On 1/24/21, David Barrett <dbarrett at expensify.com> wrote:
> >> Hi all, I'm the CEO a company called Expensify, developing a new open
> >> source chat application at https://Expensify.cash.  I was pretty
> >> prolific on the p2p-hackers mailing list back in the day, but this is my
> >> first post to Cypherpunk, so... hi!
> >
> > Punk's comment on javascript has merit.  It's hard to secure
> > javascript.  It's gotten easier, but it's still designed for the web,
> > where everything you do is handed to you by a stranger.
> 
> Re Signal and Javascript, Signal offers its code in a signed binary,
> and offers the source to that binary for anybody to build and check.
> I'm not aware that javascript has a way to provide cryptographic
> signatures of its code, but I've been out of the loop for a while.


	yeah the 'javascript model' is : you automatically run un-audited, obfuscated random garbage from random arpanet websites. The way 'javascript' is used is of course insane...and malicious. 

	It's funny to see people "developing a new open source chat application"  who can't even make a basic website which isn't fucking malware. 

	On the other hand it should be obvious that nobody should touch mr barrett's "app" even with a ten foot pole given the way he treats the visitors to his site. 



> 
> Basically a number of the design choices around signal demonstrate
> trust.  Some do not.  But more than most projects out there.