Here’s my problem: every F(L)OSS and E2EE solution that I know of requires other people to download an app or log in.

I want to reduce the friction for others to communicate for me. I want to give a business card with a URL where people can go and immediately send messages to my Matrix or my email or something, and they don’t need to log in at all.

They just open their browser, go to snek_boi.io or whatever and a chat appears.

A couple of years ago, I was suggested Cactus Comments. I suppose that works, but I was wondering if there are other solutions. I was wondering if now there was an even easier solution for my purposes.

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    e2ee is not really compatible with what you want due to necessary key management, and once you drop that there are so many possible options for what you want that I don’t want to list them all here.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Yes you can juryrig something like that with cookies, but it is highly fragile and browser based e2ee is basically a scam anyways as the server serving the website can always swap out the javascript that decrypts the messages.

        • mutual_ayed
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Fragility is by design as it’s ephemeral comms. Swapping the js decryption doesn’t make sense as wouldn’t the client just fail or refuse the message stream as the decrypt/encrypt changed? It’s an interesting problem. Thanks for giving me something to noodle on.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            The server can swap to a modified JS that exfiltrates the e2ee key and thus allows the server owner to decrypt the messages, or in more advanced encryption schemes add additional keys without you knowing and achieve the same thing.

            • mutual_ayed
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              16 hours ago

              https://medium.com/sessionstack-blog/how-javascript-works-cryptography-how-to-deal-with-man-in-the-middle-mitm-attacks-bf8fc6be546c

              I still don’t see how

              swap to a modified JS that exfiltrates the e2ee key

              or

              add additional keys

              Wouldn’t significantly change the recieved hash and break the stream thus ending comms. Also unless you’re hosting and building it yourself you have to trust the recipient and the cloud host.

              I agree if an attacker owns the server comms can be compromised. I thought that was the benefit of the ephemeral nature. It’s for quick relay of information. Best practices would probably include another cypher within the messages themselves like a one time pad or some such.

              https://www.itstactical.com/intellicom/tradecraft/uncrackable-diy-pencil-and-paper-encryption/

              https://github.com/muke1908/chat-e2ee

              • ganymede@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 hours ago

                i’m trying to understand your exact scenario.

                but in general, the problem is where do you get your original key, or original hash to verify from? if they are both coming from the server, along with the code which processes them, then if the server is compromised, so are you.

                thankfully browsers give alot of crypto API lately (as discussed in your link)

                but you still need at minimum a secure key, a hash and trusted code to verify the code the server serves you. there are ofc solutions to this problem, but if the server is unstrusted, you absolutely can’t get it from them, which means you have to get it from somewhere else (that you trust).

                • mutual_ayed
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  I don’t know yet. It’s more a thought experiment than anything else.

                  https://github.com/muke1908/chat-e2ee

                  Looks like the URL is part of the seed and salt which is cool.

                  Proving who you are is done in another stream. Like MFA.

                  You do a one time pad, generate the URL with that. Communicate what’s needed, then the URL dies.

                  I’m still noodling with it.

                  • ganymede@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    14 hours ago

                    cool, sounds like you have most of the principles down.

                    what i didn’t yet see articulated with chat-e2ee is how the actual code itself verifies itself to the user in the browser? it sounds to me like it assumes the server which serves the code is ‘trusted’, while the theoretically different server(s) which transmits the messages can be ‘untrusted’.