|
|
|
|
|
by infosechandbook
1616 days ago
|
|
> What would be your alternative? A good starting point would be more balanced articles also talking about downsides or not-so-secure/-private defaults; not only in case of XMPP but in case of any instant messaging protocol or ecosystem. Instead of claiming, "XYZ is secure because it supports TLS," articles should also mention what this means in terms of limitations (e.g., TLS protects data in transit, so server-side parties can still access the data) or defaults (e.g., only a subset of servers/clients support certain security features). While such things might be obvious to tech-savvy users, non-technical people don't understand this. They only read, "secure" and "private" and then assume, "Oh, it's secure and private, so I migrate to XYZ." In reality, "secure" and "private" aren't fixed states that you can identify by looking at some features. |
|