I find it bold stating that #DeltaChat doesn’t need a hyperscaler like #Signal does when it is based on… email servers. Where there is no audio/video calling. Where every sender and recipient server knows who is communicating with whom. Where you need to trust every decentralized server to not keep that information. Maybe be less smug if you can’t provide metadata protection. 🙄 @delta chaos.social/@delta/1154540411…
Signal's president claimed it takes billions to replicate the availability and reliability of "hyperscalers" (AWS/Google/Microsoft/Cloudfare) that Signal uses.#chatmail and #deltachat are about disproving this claim by
1) making relays super cheap (DONE)
2) enabling chat profiles to use multiple relays redundantly (WIP)
3) distributing relay knowledge among chatters (TBD).
Fat servers, corporate overlords and billionaires: not needed and better to not exist for a convivial e2ee future :)
feld likes this.
Delta Chat
in reply to Sebastian • • •Sebastian
in reply to Delta Chat • • •Delta Chat
in reply to Sebastian • • •with all due respect and recognition that pgp has a troubled history, pgp twenty years ago and #openpgp now are different things. See for example chaos.social/@delta/1145902670… or
for a more thorough security talk including discussing metadata passthesalt.ubicast.tv/videos/…
Usable end-to-end security with Delta Chat and Chatmail
Pass the SALT ArchivesDelta Chat
2025-05-29 08:51:53
Sebastian
in reply to Delta Chat • • •rakoo
in reply to Sebastian • • •Sebastian
in reply to rakoo • • •feld
in reply to Sebastian • • •rakoo
in reply to feld • • •Technology preview: Sealed sender for Signal
Signal Messengerfeld
in reply to rakoo • • •exactly. So if Delta sends all messages with a noreply@ sender on the envelope, the recipient's PGP key ID is scrubbed (already a feature in rpgp), and we have ephemeral addresses then anyone inspecting the email won't know for sure who the sender was or who the recipient is
Tada, we solved it
feld
in reply to feld • • •David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)
in reply to Delta Chat • • •But you don’t address any of the privacy issues that exist in a post-Snowden threat model. Designing something that works in this context at all is hard, doing it in a decentralised setting is even harder (doing it in a federated model is probably impossible). But you continue to criticise Signal while not even attempting to solve the problems.
You are working with the same threat model that we used when I worked on XMPP 20+ years ago, which is no longer relevant to the modern Internet.
feld
in reply to David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*) • • •and yet Signal hasn't even fixed the "phone number tied to your government identity required to have an account", "your ISP is tied to your government identity and knows the IP addresses you've used", and the "group members can be identified because they're exposing their IP addresses to the CDN" problems.
Aren't these significant post-Snowden threat model problems too?
edit: especially in a world where every one of these corporations has folded like a wet napkin and happily complies with anything the current US government demands of them
Delta Chat
in reply to David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*) • • •Delta Chat: FAQ
delta.chatDavid Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)
in reply to Delta Chat • • •Christian Kugler
in reply to Sebastian • • •Delta Chat
in reply to Christian Kugler • • •@syphdias
1) end-to-end latency on a 33EUR chatmail relay with ~200K monthly active users is sub-second. see attachment.
2) metadata details are here: delta.chat/en/help#message-met…
including a note on sealed sender (which btw Signal only does opportunistically by default, and easily falls back to non-sealed)
Delta Chat: FAQ
delta.chat