[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Matrix communication protocol.

From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira
Subject: Re: Matrix communication protocol.
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 10:43:48 -0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/68.8.0

Em 31/07/2020 16:20, Adrien Bourmault (neox on freenode) escreveu:
>    Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is

Interesting, I wonder if there are references to that.

>    The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF
>    is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a protocol
>    in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say the
>    same for Vector.

Good point. On a not so similar subject, this seems to align with the
arguments presented by Software Freedom Conservancy (SFConservancy) in
regards to copyleft enforcement (almost all of their talks, including
the recorded ones, present this "who best enforces copyleft?" paradigm,
and all results in either individual copyright holders or these signing
their contributions to one of FSF-and-sisters, SFConservancy or Software
Freedom Law Center, and avoiding non-disclosure agreements, trade
secrets and contributor license agreements).

>    of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and are XSF
>    members. There are many forks of both, and it provides additionnal

Indeed, in open standards, people and projects being members of the
standards committees/workgroups is a very important thing, specially if
many are in favor of free/libre software or if the group itself has that
commitment or is a non-profit, preferably a charity.

>    On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. And
>    it advocates for non free software, especially Google one.

The references in my previous replies to this topic also agree with you. :)

>    Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
>    privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
>    encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm (because
>    it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature lol).

That is scary indeed.

>    beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity

And with this I contribute referencing to [1].

# References

[1]: .

* Ativista do software livre
        * Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
                * Software (Free Software Directory)
                * Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
                * Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
        * Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
* Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
        * Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
* Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
        * Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
        * Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
        * Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
* Ao enviar anexos
        * Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
        * Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
        * Vide endereço anterior
* Mensagens secretas somente via
        * XMPP com OMEMO
        * E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]