That’s not “probably”. If they have the key they straight up have access. The key to my house can’t just probably unlock the door.
seriously, that’s the most convoluted wording possible for a simple statement. If they have the private keys they have the private keys and there’s no need for analysis.
Stop using fascist things.
Stores, websites, apps, cars, hosting, operating systems, and all other providers of goods/services should be audited by you. You should then ask yourself if you want to give them your money and/or your trust.
Which effectively means the messages aren’t encrypted. Cool.
It also effectively means they are reading those messages.
I mean they’re encrypted in transit. They’re just not end to end encrypted.
Do not look at all those (proprietary) E2EE definitions to closely - you might find several that define TLS as end to end…
I mean TLS is also encryption in transit, it’s in the name. And it would sorta be end to end if you’re terminating TLS at the end you’re trying to talk to.
Thats the problem. Say, I’m offering you a cloud drive and tell you “your data is end to end encrypted”. You sync data from your PC to my server and from my server to your mobile phone. Would that mean
- That everything between your devices is encrypted (=I can’t see what you’re saving, neither can “the state”, hackers,…)or
- That your data is encrypted in transit, but is saved unencrypted on my server (which means everyone with access to my server can see your data) or
- It’s encrypted in transit and also on my server, but the keys are also ony server, so that everyone with access to my server can in theory decrypt everything and access everything?
1 is what you want, 2 and 3 are often what you get…
It’s not that I disagree with you on principle, I think you’re just kinda mixing up scenarios here, and the purpose of E2EE. E2EE refers to in transit data specifically. #1 should never be where your mind goes because E2EE does not imply your data will be encrypted at rest at the destination, that’s not what it’s for. E2EE is a critical factor when the untrusted facilitator party is between you and your intended recipient, not the recipient themselves.
Like in your scenario of a “cloud drive”, E2EE would not be a selling point of that service. The term you’re looking for in that scenario is “zero access encryption”.
Like you’re correct that E2EE does not imply that data stored in the cloud is encrypted at rest, but that’s because it isn’t meant to. Like this isn’t a dirty marketing trick. E2EE just needs to do what it says on the tin, which this X chat does not because they in order for it to be E2EE, it needs to be the case that only the recipient can decrypt it.
The third paragraph contradicts your other point. You define E2EE in two wildly different ways.
The chat messages are most likely stored on an intermediary server, which would qualify for the same loophole you pointed out in the cloud storage example.
Xchat is an irc client though.
The one true XChat
And yet people still keep using Twatter like it’s the only thing that has ever existed since the dawn of the internet. At this point, you deserve to get wrecked for still using this platform.
If anyone except you has the private key, then your private messages are not private.
To extend this, that includes YOU giving your key to another application to decrypt those messages.
For example if you use an app or browser extension, that app or browser extension has access to that key. Additionally the browser itself or operating system had access to the key.
Now they may be fully audited. They may have a great reputation. You may trust them. But they are part of the decryption (and if sending encryption) process.
It’s a chain of trust, you have to trust the whole chain.
No way. Impossible. Of course convenience never has a price tag.
/s for typical users of today’s Web
Yes and? Do people who use X really care about privacy. Everyone who even remotely cared already jumped ship and moved on to matrix, signal, Simplex etc.
And im not even mentioning the fact X is owned by a psychopath. But hey let’s pretend they care about your privacy.
If a corporate entity made it and hosts it, and it isn’t foss, don’t chat on it.
There is another layer here. If you or the person you’re talking to are using an entirely unmodified android or apple phone, you don’t have any privacy even if you’re on TOR connected to an encrypted xmpp chat. Your entire existence is backdoored. The entire OS speaks back to its maker, especially that keyboard.
