Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tepix | Hacker News Reader

Right now, the most insecure aspect of TextSecure is that it's not yet available on iOS. Can't wait!

Also, I hope in the long run it'll be decentralized like XMPP. I'd prefer to run my own server to make it harder to gather metadata on a large scale.

View on HN

They're set to add the messaging feature to the "Signal - Private Messenger" app. Although, when is the question.

https://itunes.apple.com/app/id874139669

https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-iOS

Don't hold your breath. Every now and then I check out the GitHub repo but there's not a lot of activity there.

It's a pity... I'd be willing to pay for an iOS port, if only to be able to push my friend circle to switch away from WhatsApp.

You can help pay for iOS development of TextSecure in tax deductible form.

https://freedom.press/bundle/encryption-tools-journalists

Thanks for pointing that out. I was curious where to donate to them as well.

What I actually haven't understood yet, is why people insist on using TexSecure, when it's in no way superior to XMPP (+OTR, if you want privacy), and is also centralized.

You even seem to be aware of the existance of XMPP, so why do you choose this new, inferior alternative?

As far as I know, XMPP requires keeping a connection alive when you want to receive realtime messages. On most mobile OS, keeping alive that connection and responding to it requires keeping the CPU awake, which severely affects battery life.

TextSecure can use the mobile OS's built in push notifications, which gives you realtime message receipt without killing your battery.

XMPP may be superior when it comes to security/technology but TextSecure is superior when it comes to usability and practicality on mobile devices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com