this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2025
8 points (90.0% liked)

Privacy

3071 readers
188 users here now

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be civil and no prejudice
  2. Don't promote big-tech software
  3. No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
  4. No reposting of news that was already posted
  5. No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
  6. No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Interesting counterpoint to the stuff we sometimes talk about here. It's more for public chat rooms though. MLS (RFC 9240) still interests me and I've been wanting to try coding it.

top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Different models for different cases, right? It's only a counterpoint if one believes that the message is "federate everything."

There is no privacy guarantee in federated systems. There's no privacy in public forums, full stop; nor should there be any expectation of any. You can barely achieve any privacy trust in 1:1 communications, and much less any form of many-to-many.

Anonymity is another matter - you can have anonymity, if you're careful, but privacy? No. Federation is not about providing privacy, or even anonymity - there's no section either in the AP specification.

For private communications, you use different technologies; P2P is a good option, but you can get privacy and anonymity in federated systems like Nostr, which - while capable of being a public forum - has all the parts needed to achieve anonymity and privacy.

Tox has a good model which they can't seem to get to work. 0xchat is interesting.

It gets said repeatedly: you tailer your solution to your threat model; there's one size fits all.