News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Telegram is insecure (2015) by tptacek on Sunday January 06, 2019 @11:02AM (#18838941)
Signal is the best-studied multiparty secure messaging protocol; there are academic papers that provide formal analyses. Trevor and Moxie won the Levchin Prize at Real World Crypto for Signal Protocol; the Levchin steering committee is a "Who's Who" of cryptographers, as are the other winners of the prize.

No, Signal is not "homebrew crypto".

Re:Why Telegram is insecure (2015) by raverbashing on Sunday January 06, 2019 @12:23PM (#18839347)
What would be a good definition of Homebrew crypto?

Sure, if I put some primitives together (even if I had a good knowledge of how to do it) in a closed product and nobody evaluates it (and I add a label like "military security") that's Homebrew, no questions.

But all systems are born "in secret" (at least for a short while). Unless the definition involves appeal to authority.

Re:Why Telegram is insecure (2015) by tptacek on Sunday January 06, 2019 @12:37PM (#18839428)
Obviously, the term is a straightforward appeal to authority.
Re:Why Telegram is insecure (2015) by raverbashing on Sunday January 06, 2019 @01:53PM (#18839858)
Which is sometimes unjustly described as fallacious, though even the best can make mistakes.
Re:Why Telegram is insecure (2015) by tptacek on Sunday January 06, 2019 @02:11PM (#18839981)
Hopefully we agree on the authority here. But I jumped the gun on my response a little as well, because my argument isn't simply an appeal to authority; for instance, you can just go read the formal analyses of Signal Protocol and evaluate them for yourself. Maybe IEEE EuroS&P was wrong to accept the paper!