https://github.com/positive-intentions/chat

probably not… Because I’m comparing it to everything… but id like to share some details about how my app works so you can tell me what im missing. id like to have wording in my app to say something like “most secure chat app in the world”… i probably cant do that because it doesnt qualify… but i want to understand why?

im not an expert on cyber security. im sure there are many gaps in my knowlege in this domain.

using javascript, i created a chat app. it is using peerjs-server to create an encrypted webrtc connection. this is then used to exchange additional encryption keys from cryptography functions built into browsers to add a redundent layer of encryption. the key exchange is done like diffie-helman over webrtc (which can be considered secure when exchanged over public channels)

  • i sometimes recieve feedback like “javascript is inherently insecure”. i disagree with this and have opened sourced my cryptography module. its basically a thin wrapper around vanilla crypto functions of a browser. a prev post on the matter.

  • another concern for my kind of app (PWA) is that the developer may introduce malicious code. this is an important point for which i open sourced the project and give instructions for selfhosting. selhosting this app has some unique features. unlike many other selfhosted projects, this app can be hosted on github-pages for free (instructions are provided in the readme). im also working on introducing a way that users can selfhost federated modules. a prev post on the matter.

  • to prevent things like browser extensions, the app uses strict CSP headers to prevent unauthorised code from running. selfhosting users should take note of this when setting up their own instance.

  • i received feedback the Signal/Simplex protocol is great, etc. id like to compare that opinion to the observation in how my todo app demo works. (the work is all experimental work-in-progress and far from finished). the demo shows a simple functionality for a basic decentralized todo list. this should already be reasonably secure. i could add a few extra endpoints for exchanging keys diffie-helman style. which at this point is relatively trivial to implement. I think it’s simplicity could be a security feature.

  • the key detail that makes this approach unique, is because as a webapp, unlike other solutions, users have a choice of using any device/os/browser.

i think if i stick to the principle of avoiding using any kind of “required” service provider (myself included) and allowing the frontend and the peerjs-server to be hosted independently, im on track for creating a chat system with the “fewest moving parts”. im hope you will agree this is true p2p and i hope i can use this as a step towards true privacy and security. security might be further improved by using a trusted VPN.

i created a threat-model for the app in hopes that i could get a pro-bono security assessment, but understandable the project is too complicated for pro-bono work.

while there are several similar apps out there like mine. i think mine is distinctly a different approach. so its hard to find best practices for the functionalities i want to achieve. in particular security practices to use when using p2p technology.

(note: this app is an unstable, experiment, proof of concept and not ready to replace any other app or service. It’s far from finished and provided for testing and demo purposes only. This post is to get feedback on the app to determine if i’m going in the right direction for a secure chat app)

    • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think saying someone is stunted when they are learning is pretty out of line. OP has asked for feedback on his project and has been polite and cordial.

      You’re coming across as an unhelpful ass.

      Are you willing to share any of your projects?

    • positive_intentions@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I think my writing is radically improved and maybe even more clear when I use an LLM. In my experience, when I do this, it seems people are more reluctant to reply to a wall of LLM text as it’s seen as low-effort.

      I think my app has some strange concepts which are hard enough to explain in my own words. Im sure it must look like bs when it’s clearly LLM output.

      I think just learning to write better can be achieved with more thought and care, but for me it can become a bit obsessive over the use of words and how they might be interpreted. So I usually just go off the cuff.

    • Mubelotix
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Harsh but true. People are only going to trust a big transparent organization

      • positive_intentions@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        As organizations become bigger, I think they can get a better marketing team. The main heavyweight in chat-apps is whatsapp. I think we can agree that it isn’t transparent.