[hunter2_]

I agree. But I suppose it does have a slight benefit that if you trust the individuals at Zoom who implemented the encryption, now you no longer need to also trust the individuals at Zoom who have access to network traffic and/or server-side code but not client application code.

This slight benefit is fairly silly, because we have no reason to give greater credibility (regarding ethics) to one set over another. At least it's a smaller set, though.

[rsa25519]

Didn't Zoom hire Keybase to do their encryption?

> This slight benefit is fairly silly, because we have no reason to give greater credibility (regarding ethics) to one set over another. At least it's a smaller set, though.

Well, before we had to trust simply that people with networking access were non-malicious. Now, we can simply trust that at least one of [crypto, network] people are non-malicious. That seems like an improvement to me.

[kelnos]

For me, hiring the Keybase team did not increase my trust in Zoom; it sadly lowered my opinion of the Keybase team (which had already taken a hit due to their integration of cryptocurrency into the Keybase platform).