Replying to Avatar Keychat

When we started conceptualizing Keychat, we aimed to design a chat application that surpasses Signal. Our design process was divided into four steps.

First, Keychat addresses issues of user sovereignty. It opts to use Nostr public keys as IDs and Nostr relays for message transmission. Users fully own their IDs, which are not registered on any server. They can choose which relays to use.

Second, Keychat aims to solve the security issue of message encryption by implementing end-to-end encryption that ensures both forward secrecy and backward secrecy. Keychat implements the Signal protocol (X3DH and the Double Ratchet algorithm) on the client side without the need for a coordination server. Existing Nostr relays only need to handle the transmission of encrypted messages.

Third, Keychat tackles the problem of metadata privacy. A major issue with original Nostr DMs is that metadata is not only exposed to relay operators but also to other users. Keychat separates the sending address and receiving addresses from the ID, updating these addresses for almost every message. Thus, each Keychat message is nearly independent.

Lastly, Keychat addresses the issue of user payments and relay charges. Since each message is not linked to an ID, traditional payment models are not feasible. Initially, we thought of having relays issue one-time anonymous access tokens that users could purchase and use for anonymous pay-per-use. Later, we realized that using Bitcoin ecash as postage for messages would be a better solution.

Ultimately, we designed a chat application where users maintain sovereignty, messages are securely encrypted, metadata privacy is preserved, and the economic model is straightforward and reliable. nostr:note1kr8nvdlhz207rq6z300xy6qylf9mmpgjxgfq6925vkez4f3ej3gqh5f0te

Great ideas, but I think relying only on ecash is a risk. Cashu and Fedimint are not well established jet. Why not integrating lightning as well?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Yes, we are aware of the custodial risks associated with ecash. However, the transaction fees on the Lightning Network are high, comparable to those charged by Phoenix. Additionally, completing a payment on the Lightning Network involves multiple steps. The privacy offered by LN also does not match that of ecash. Therefore, we choose ecash as our form of postage.

I mean that the transaction fees for self-hosted Lightning Network transfers are much more expensive than ecash.

What are the fees for ecash? Also, 1 sat will be 1 dollar sooner that we realize. So what do we do when 1 message = 1 dollar?

The Cashu protocol will support currency units smaller than 1 sat, such as 0.01 sat.

nostr:note1exjy7radjlfy8lhk8ulqk08p5fcvjll85yl706s5jt6zwvqjgw9se7dzcx