- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
This collection of networks offers no end to end encryption. Anyone with administrator access to an Instance can read anything that travels through that Instance’s infrastructure – including direct messages. The level of risk correlates with the number of cross-Instance interactions between users. If users from different Instances communicate, an attacker need only compel one Instance to reveal the direct messages between all of the interacting accounts. The centralised equivalents – Twitter, Tumblr, etc – can cloak their users through governance and resources. In a peer-to-peer network without encryption, there’s no structure, no agreed-upon governance, and absolutely no protection. Compromising or compelling an Instance or its staff means that all of network traffic is laid bare to its assailant.
I’d love to have a discussion on this (now fairly old) article which IMO has yet to provoke the kind of much-needed action on this topic that we, as a community of cypherpunks, are capable of.
So, if I’m understanding you correctly, we shouldn’t improve the security of Lemmy? We should just leave it as-is? Interesting and weird take.
IMO, instead we should at least turn off or rebrand the direct/private messaging feature to prevent people from using it as such.