@strypey We're moving forward with end-to-end encrypted messaging over ActivityPub.

[evan@cosocial.ca]

@strypey We're moving forward with end-to-end encrypted messaging over ActivityPub. https://github.com/swicg/activitypub-e2ee/ MLS, the encryption technology, was meant to scale to hundreds of thousands of people, but my guess is that AP E2EE chats will more likely scale to the more personal handful, max a couple of dozen. I don't think it's a Discord replacement, but it's in the mix.

[adam@social.lein.us]

@evan @strypey Because we don't already have enough incompatible interpersonal electronic messaging systems, huh? :-O https://bookofadamz.com/the-smartest-messaging-method-is-not-a-segregated-mess-of-whatsapp-signal-telegram-sms-slack-teams-facebook-instagram-wechat-etc/

[evan@cosocial.ca]

@Adam @strypey We looked at several models of integration. Letting people send private messages from one ActivityPub account to another made the most sense.

https://swicg.github.io/activitypub-e2ee/integration-models.html

[evan@cosocial.ca]

@Adam @strypey That said, MLS is an open standard, so it's entirely possible that we can bridge to other carrier protocols and maintain E2EE.

[adam@social.lein.us]

@evan @strypey Every ActivityPub server already uses email to send private messages for notifications, password resets, etc., right? Every AP server already requires an email address for every registered user, right? Why not use the open standard private messaging system that we already are using?

[adam@social.lein.us]

@evan @strypey What's missing from the existing standard protocol for "type message press send" that can't be added and justifies a new protocol that does the exact same thing? If you want to make the ActivityPub identity an email address, GREAT, install Dovecot on the server. I would love that actually.

[evan@cosocial.ca]

@Adam @strypey Good luck in this!