Avatar
crany πŸ‘½πŸ§‘πŸ—Ώ
5ee1b38c1cea0ada124ea2d0a693c57f5fafeab112a22f773736cb595b5b4608
Bitcoin enthusiast, nostrich, crypto hobbyist, technologist, libertarian, optimist, human.
Replying to Avatar Keychat

Old Nostr DM (NIP-4) integrates four capabilities into a single Nostr keyβ€”it serves as an ID, an encryption key, a receiving address, and a sending address.

The encryption key in NIP-4 does not change, so NIP-4 messages lack both forward secrecy and backward secrecy.

Consequently, if the private key is compromised, both historical and future messages can be exposed.

The receiving and sending addresses remain constant, which poses a severe issue for metadata privacy in NIP-4 messages;

Everyone can see who (ID) is sending messages to whom (ID).

Currently, most Nostr apps use NIP-4 for DM functionalities, such as Damus and Primal.

β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”

New Nostr DM (NIP-17) integrates three capabilities into a single Nostr keyβ€”it serves as an ID, an encryption key, and a receiving address.

Kind-17 separates the sending address from the ID, making the sending address random and concealing the sender's real ID, thus improving metadata privacy.

The encryption key in NIP-17 does not change, so NIP-17 messages also lack forward secrecy and backward secrecy. Once the private key is leaked, both historical and future messages will be compromised.

The receiving address remains constant, so there is still a slight issue with metadata privacy in NIP-17 messages; everyone can see who (ID) is receiving messages.

Apps like 0xchat and Amethyst use NIP-17 to implement DM functionalities.

β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”

In Keychat, the ID, encryption key, receiving address, and sending address are separated.

The encryption key, the receiving address, and the sending address are updated independently and continuously.

Keychat's encryption key is derived using the Signal protocol, and each message uses a unique encryption key, which is deleted after use.

Thus, Keychat messages have both forward secrecy and backward secrecy. Even if an encryption key is compromised, only the current message can be leaked, and historical and future messages remain secure.

Keychat's sending address is randomly generated for each message.

Therefore, external parties do not know the sender's ID.

Keychat's receiving address is derived using the Signal protocol, with almost every message using a unique receiving address.

Thus, external parties do not know the receiver's ID.

β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”

However, it's important to emphasize that NIP-4 and NIP-17 offer superior multi-device synchronization capabilities because they integrate three capabilities into a single Nostr keyβ€”it serves as an ID, an encryption key, and a receiving address.

Replying to Avatar Samuel Gabriel

When Google Met WikiLeaks: Assange’s Warning on Big Tech

In When Google Met WikiLeaks (2014), Julian Assange offers a provocative critique of Google’s deep ties to U.S. intelligence and global power structures. The book revolves around a 2011 meeting between Assange and Eric Schmidt, then-CEO of Google, revealing how the tech giant operates beyond its public image as a neutral innovator. Assange argues that Google is not just a company but a key player in mass surveillance, political influence, and state-aligned digital control.

A Meeting That Revealed More Than Expected

While under house arrest in the UK, Assange met with Schmidt and a group of Google executives, including Jared Cohen, Lisa Shields, and Scott Malcomson. The official purpose was a discussion for Schmidt’s book, The New Digital Age, but Assange later revealed that the meeting shed light on Google’s alignment with U.S. intelligence and foreign policy objectives.

The conversation, which Assange recorded and later published, provides an inside look at how Big Tech collaborates with government power in ways that go far beyond the public narrative of innovation and progress.

Key Themes of the Book

1. Google’s Role in Government Surveillance

Assange presents evidence that Google is deeply embedded in U.S. intelligence operations, with strong ties to the NSA, CIA, and State Department. He describes Google’s vast data collection as a powerful tool for state surveillance, positioning the company as a corporate extension of government intelligence agencies.

2. The Internet: A Tool for Liberation or Control?

Schmidt portrays Google as a force for global connectivity and progress, but Assange warns that centralized platforms like Google could become tools for behavioral control, censorship, and mass surveillance. This debateβ€”whether technology serves to empower or to dominateβ€”remains highly relevant today as data privacy concerns and algorithmic manipulation grow worldwide.

3. A Clash of Worldviews: Assange vs. Schmidt

The book highlights the ideological divide between Assange and Schmidt:

Schmidt sees Google as a neutral, benevolent force shaping the future of the internet.

Assange sees Google as a geopolitical actor, actively shaping events in alignment with U.S. interests.

This fundamental disagreement raises pressing questions: Are tech companies neutral, or are they geopolitical players? Who holds them accountable?

4. Google’s Influence in Global Politics

Assange argues that Google is not just a business but a political powerhouse. He highlights Google’s involvement in the Arab Spring, where executives played roles in supporting opposition movements. According to Assange, such actions demonstrate that Google wields state-like power, influencing political events around the world in ways that often go unnoticed.

Why This Book Matters Today

A decade later, When Google Met WikiLeaks remains a crucial warning about Big Tech’s unchecked power. Many of Assange’s concerns have only intensified:

Corporate-government surveillance partnerships are stronger than ever.

Tech giants influence political discourse through content moderation and AI-driven algorithms.

Privacy concerns have escalated, with increasing mass data collection.

Assange’s book challenges readers to consider whether the internet remains a tool for freedomβ€”or if it is becoming a mechanism of control by a handful of powerful corporations.

Final Thoughts

More than just a conversation, When Google Met WikiLeaks serves as a wake-up call about the future of digital power. Assange urges us to question who really controls the internet and whether companies like Google are champions of free information or gatekeepers of surveillance and influence.

i have a Plan B and ES hangover