Ge0rG, First case I'm aware of is the UK selling Enigma systems post-war. However, I have a suspicion that there's a similar case after the Napoleonic wars.
pep.
edhelas, conspiracy!
dwd
edhelas, I'm not sure that wold be relevant. It's unclear to me if that would fit the threat model.✎
pep.
Daniel is an undercover agent
dwd
edhelas, I'm not sure that would be relevant. It's unclear to me if that would fit the threat model. ✏
pep.
oops
krauqhas joined
dwd
edhelas, In particular, BND presumably do trust their server, and probably more than the mobile devices used in the field.
vanitasvitae
edhelas: shhhh
pep.
Curious to know if there's anything you can do to prevent messages leaking once a terminal is compromised :x (as long as it's not known to be)
dwd
pep., It's more that if you think a device might be compromised, with OMEMO/Signal/etc the device has a cleartext archive, whereas without it won't and you can cut access to the server-side archive.
mathijshas left
pep.
without what e2ee it won't have a cleartext archive?
pep.
I'm not sure I understand
pep.
You mean the client won't explicitely store locally?
lskdjfhas joined
dwd
pep., For example, with WhatsApp, the device stores a database of all the message history.
dwd
pep., Whereas with Pando (for example) we explicitly don't, and instead pull that from the server.
pep.
That doesn't mean it doesn't see the cleartext messages
dwd
pep., Sure. But there's a matter of the effect of a compromise post-discovery.
mathijshas joined
pep.
(you kinda have to, I don't have bionic e2ee-capable eyes)
dwd
pep., The question isn't who and what device can see the messages. The question is where the archive is kept at rest.
pep.
Well this assumes you have any doubts
dwd
pep., Well, only in as much as if someone compromises a device without your knowing all bets are off no matter what you do.
pep.
what I said above :)
dwd
pep., So not much point in considering that case. Instead, consider the cases where endpoint compromise is known.
dwd
pep., And decide which you think is the greater risk - for some, that'll be the server being compromised, for others, the client. Which you feel is the bigger risk means you might want OMEMO-style encryption or not.
pep.
Sure there's a point in considering it as well. It's certainly a lot easier to get a hold of a user terminal when that user is targetted. When the user is not targetted directly and people are just interested in data, it's probably faster to try and compromise the server and I bet there's lots of servers not that good security-wise
dwd
pep., Right, but for a foreign intel agency, I would suspect the risk of a compromised client is probably higher.
dwd
pep., Same for us, actually. I believe the risk of a community nurse leaving their phone in a patient's house is higher than someone breaking into our servers.
dwd
pep., But that won't be the same for everyone, of course.
pep.
Who knows.. One would hope they employ capable people and they give us the freedom to act✎
pep.
Who knows.. One would hope they employ capable people and they give them the freedom to act ✏
nyco-2has joined
adiaholichas left
larmahas joined
adiaholichas joined
Zash
Myeah, forgetting my phone somewhere does seem more likely than someone breaking into my server room and/or server.
dwd
Zash, But if you ran your server for thousands on people, the risk profile might change.✎
dwd
Zash, But if you ran your server for thousands of people, the risk profile might change. ✏
dwd
Zash, For you, if not for your users.
Zash
I don't, so my users == { me }
lorddavidiiihas left
dwd
My best understanding of why WhatsApp have encryption is to protect themselves from subpoena activity, not for security for their users as such.
Zash
Makes sense.
lorddavidiiihas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
eevvoorhas joined
lorddavidiiihas joined
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
eevvoorhas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
emus
vanitasvitae, Ge0rG: I mean lets take away their money - modern problems need modern solutions :)
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Ge0rG
dwd: it has helped very much, hasn't it? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-brazil/facebook-executive-jailed-in-brazil-as-court-seeks-whatsapp-data-idUSKCN0W34WF
pep.
Open reuters > Get visually agressed by cookies' consent bs > Manage consent > JS error..
Ge0rGhas the "I don't care about cookies" extension and didn't notice anything
pep.
I have a similar extension but I still get their annoying popup
Dele Olajidehas left
nyco-2has left
nyco-2has joined
Dele Olajidehas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
lorddavidiiihas joined
mukt2has left
Alexhas left
Douglas Terabytehas left
paulhas left
eevvoorhas joined
mukt2has joined
pdurbinhas left
rionhas left
rionhas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
moparisthebesthas joined
Douglas Terabytehas joined
eevvoorhas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Alexhas joined
mukt2has left
Neustradamus
I have a little request, can you open: https://nl.movim.eu/?feed/pubsub.movim.eu/Movim
When you click on the publication titles, have you the publication or other?
eevvoorhas joined
MattJ
I get prompted to download the atom feed
pep.
Firefox?
MattJ
Yes
pep.
I'm not sure browsers parse this correctly anymore.. curl tells me "content-type: application/atom+xml; charset=UTF-8" so that's correct right?
Neustradamus
Thanks guys, you have confirmed the problem to edhelas, I am not alone ;)
pep.
Neustradamus, I'd say your client is the issue. Use a proper feed reader
edhelas
the problem is that the feed reader is not taking the alternate + text/html
edhelas
but only the first alternate, that is kinda an issue; so i'll fix that one
Neustradamus
The problem is linked to (for example):
</content>
<link rel="enclosure" type="image/png" href="https://upload.movim.eu/files/9d94237298995552fa13436420195fbca436dce7/jDBsJ9BW7g66gCZ3G3ARICSq5T3dsAg9j75CnNOr/image.png"/>
<link rel="alternate" href="https://upload.movim.eu/files/9d94237298995552fa13436420195fbca436dce7/jDBsJ9BW7g66gCZ3G3ARICSq5T3dsAg9j75CnNOr/image.png"/>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://nl.movim.eu/?node/pubsub.movim.eu/Movim/87633da7-3963-4923-aabc-54ac5f6ad1d8"/>
</entry>
pep.
edhelas, if that's a problem to you then then I think it's before that.
pep.
HTTP Headers
edhelas
Neustradamus I actually told you 2min ago that I will fix the issue, why bothering the people here about that ?
Neustradamus
edhelas: I sent here before you understand the problem
edhelas
also, Atom implementation in Movim is definitly not a topic related to this chatroom
mukt2has joined
Neustradamus
edhelas: I can not join the main mucroom ;)
pep.
yes you've been banned, for reasons one can understand
paulhas joined
Neustradamus
I know that some people do not like when we inform about problems, we can see a new time today.
If no people inform, no solution ;)
MattJ
Sometimes it's not about the information, but about the delivery
eevvoorhas left
mukt2has left
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
nyco-2has left
nyco-2has joined
mukt2has joined
pdurbinhas joined
nyco-2has left
nyco-2has joined
Alex
Reminder that the current application period ends by the end of this week. In case you want to appy, recruit someone to apply, or need to reapply:
https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Membership_Applications_Q1_2020
Thanks
Daniel
jonas’: ^
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
LNJhas left
LNJhas joined
pdurbinhas left
mukt2has left
Guus
Daniel is yours a haiku? 🙂
Wojtekhas joined
Zashhas left
jonas’
application done, thanks
Zashhas joined
dwd
jonas’, Any chance we can last call XEP-0345 again? I have no idea what happened to it last time. Board, BTW, not Council.
serge90has left
pep.
It's be voted in by board
pep.
Last board
dwd
pep., Has it? Showing as Proposed, currently.
pep.
I was the only one to answer the LC and board didn't take that into account anyway
jonas’
I must’ve missed that one, can you dig up records?
dwd
pep., And LC ending over two years ago.
pep.
hmm when was that again..
moparisthebest
again, many people aren't getting all mailing list posting because xsf's mailmain still breaks DKIM and SPF and therefore DMARC
moparisthebest
I get maybe half of the emails sent to the list, it depends on the email settings of the sender
moparisthebest
(please fix mailmain)
jonas’
I love how those "anti spam" technologies break valid usecases while not preventing spam.
jonas’
but yeah, we should probably get that fixed
serge90has joined
moparisthebest
why do I keep typing mailmain instead of mailman...
Zash
Those aren't anti-spam
jonas’
AFAIK it involves:
- Turn off the footer
- Turn off the subject prefix
- Enable the masquerading of From for DMARC-protected domains
moparisthebest
so dmarc allows a pass if *either* SPF or DKIM passes, you can't not break SPF, so if you simply stop breaking DKIM that should fix everything
nyco-2has left
moparisthebest
which yes, turn off footer and subject prefix
jonas’
it will fix everything related to DMARC, but break the UX
moparisthebest
make sure the List-Unsubscribe header is set, and you'll be golden
jonas’
can we get a mailman admin, please?
pep.
What are the cons again of validating dkim at the mailing list level and having the mailing list then do dkim itself? Not being able to validate end-to-end?
jonas’
cc @ MattJ
jonas’
pep., the cons are that it doesn’t help
pep.
how so
jonas’
(also, operational cost)
jonas’
pep., you still break the DKIM signature of the original sender
Zash
Just masquerade the Sender and be done with it
pep.
You remove it even. The list signs itself
moparisthebest
you can do that too ^
moparisthebest
I mean, instead
jonas’
pep., and then the receiver looks up the DMARC record and sees that there should be a signature for that sender
pep.
jonas’, the sender being the list?
jonas’
depends
jonas’
I always get confused with Sender vs. MAIL-FROM vs. From:
jonas’
and also Return-Path
mukt2has joined
Zash
From is purely metadata, you can put whatever you want there
pep.
Well Return-Path is the list here, and I'd put both enveloppe and the other as the list anyway and sign with the list.
Zash
!= routing data
jonas’
pep., requires setting up and maintaining a DKIM thing though
pep.
If I want to validate who sent what I'd use normal gpg signing
jonas’
pep., yeah, tell that please to the DKIM idiots
pep.
not what I'm saying
Zash
pep.: Footers can break gpg tho
jonas’
Zash, they’re attached as separate text/plain part
Zash
Right. Not on every list tho.
pep.
I always assume DKIM allows us to validate point-to-point. I'd expect the list to do the validation always, not a host at the other end of the chain
Zash
*mumble* Google Groups
pep.
assumed*
moparisthebest
I get people have opinions re: DKIM/SPF/DMARC but that's not really relevant, they are a thing most email providers implement, and if we want most people to be able to recieve mail to the list, it has to be fixed
jonas’
moparisthebest, yeah, help me get hands on a mailman admin
pep.
moparisthebest, yeah I'm proposing a practical solution :p
jonas’
pep., setting up and maintaining OpenDKIM is *not* practical
jonas’
(on the XSF resource budget either way)
pep.
semantics
pep.
Meaning I'm not just talking about protocols because I like to talk about protocols
moparisthebest
(I run rspamd which does DKIM+SPF+DMARC+spam stuff automatically, and is easier to set up than opendkim+spf+spamassassin+amavisd+everything else)
jonas’
I love especially how rspamd depends on redis, but doesn’t support redis clusters.
moparisthebest
but beside the point, there are basically 2 ways it can be fixed:
1. stop breaking DKIM signatures (don't add footer or mangle subject)
2. send from xmpp domain instead
moparisthebest
the XSF mail server *should* already be validating dmarc/dkim/spf or it can be used to forward unauthorized mail/spam
moparisthebest
does anything actually stop me from sending mail as a board member to a board-only mailing list?
jonas’
moparisthebest, this is a question I’ve been asking myself for quite some time and which I wanted to pen-test after having asked board, but I never got around to actually do that.
moparisthebest
what's the official way to get that on the board's agenda as a question?
jonas’
send a message to board@
jonas’
someone will hopefully fish it out of the moderation queue
pep.
moparisthebest, "as a board member"?
jonas’
aside from that I may still have +w on the board trello, or you can ask pep. who’s on board, too.
pep.
I don't think you can send stuff to board@ if you're not subscribed can you?
moparisthebest
pep., like, impersonating your email for instance
jonas’
pep., but the subscription only checks From
jonas’
(or maybe Sender)
pep.
ah I see
pep.
We're not using board@ anyway, and I don't like it
moparisthebest
and if it doesn't do dkim/dmarc/spf or something, then I can happily send "official board emails" from ralphm or pep. or whoever
pep.
So you can send what you want. Plus I always sign my emails :P
jonas’
email from is not to be trusted. news at 11.
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
pep.
yeah
moparisthebest
right, and all those are terrible hacks to add authentication to it :/
pep.
yes
moparisthebest
it's getting better, but hacking that on after the fact is rough
moparisthebest
also ARC incoming...
moparisthebest
http://arc-spec.org/ ^
pep.
dwd, MR 20190307T15:16:48Z 000 <ralphm> motion carries. Let the Editors go through to the mechanics to move XEP-0345 to Active.
It's indeed not been processed by editors, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's your fault. There are many other editors :x
jonas’
were there back then though?
pep.
No, but there are others
jonas’
reminds me to ask board to clean up editor membership
pep.
yeah
mukt2has joined
jonas’
I abused my privileges to create https://trello.com/c/8Q5XQWks/388-clean-up-editor-team-memberships
pep.
how dare you
pep.
Thanks, looks good
adiaholichas left
adiaholichas joined
eevvoorhas joined
dwd
I always sign my emails too - I put "Dave." at the bottom.
Alexhas left
SubPubhas left
pep.
Indeed. Just like signatures we use on legally binding documents, it's been proven it works very well
Alexhas joined
pep.
(I had a hard time making it less sarcastic)
lovetoxhas joined
wojtekhas joined
jonas’
Subject: [Standards] ACTIVE: XEP-0345 (Form of Membership Applications)
wojtekhas left
jonas’
there we go
pep.
Thanks :)
jonas’
ah, I need to re-last-call '402
mukt2has left
serge90has left
serge90has joined
calvinhas joined
lovetox
dwd, the example in 402 for publish options is not the best
lovetox
you use max_items = 10000
lovetox
if you are a new client and there are existing bookmarks, this results 99% in a failed publish
dwd
lovetox, PRs welcome. I didn't actually write that one, I think Link Mauve did (he actually wrote most of that spec at this point, we should make him an author).
Daniel
Yeah I think that probably predates the max thing in pubsub
lovetox
ah k, yeah we should change that, there is a new max-items=max in pbusub
lovetox
though this probably also will fail, because no server supports that yet
Daniel
And having a 'magic' number was the best we good do before
Zash
Ugh
Daniel
Yes 'atomic bookmarks in pep' probably just depends on max being supported
Daniel
Which should be mentioned somewhere
Ge0rG
has the "max" bike shedding settled yet?
dwd
Daniel, "PEP Native Bookmarks". I bikeshedded the name a bit further.
Ge0rG
IIRC there was a revamp by server developers who objected because "max" is not a valid integer
jonas’
dwd, though I consider that name slightly confusing
jonas’
I plan to bikeshed on that one
Daniel
Yes you can name it whatever you want as long as it's called atomic bookmarks in pep
Ge0rG, Heisenberg's Bookmarks? You know how to store them or what they are, but not both?
Ge0rG
dwd: I appreciate that. +1
Ge0rG
Also what's the dance I need to perform to determine whether PEP on my server is persistent?
Ge0rG
(as in: stored to disk, not to RAM)
krauqhas left
Daniel
I think there is a feature
mukt2has joined
Ellenor Malik
> dwd has written:
> edhelas, In particular, BND presumably do trust their server, and probably more than the mobile devices used in the field.
Trusting the server does not seem like a viable threat model ever
Zash
Ge0rG, `#persistent-items` maybe?
pep.
I'd like the max_items=max thing to be settled so that we can actually use the feature :x
Zash
But muh validation code :(
Ge0rG
I wouldn't be opposed to make `-1` the new max.
pep.
I'll let you bikeshed the thing, I just need the feature
Ge0rG
because max_items=0 can obviously mean "you shall not pass", but -1 is actually something like "unlimited" in computerese
Ge0rG
But I suppose the author is already fed up with the unicode discussion
dwd
Ellenor Malik, At all? Ever? I trust my server because it's in the same room as me right now, and only I have access.
Ellenor Malik
Never ever.
dwd
Ellenor Malik, For anything?
Ge0rG
dwd: but you are not always in that room, are you?
dwd
Ge0rG, Pretty much. :-)
Ge0rG
dwd: I've heard rumors of you being in Brussels and not having your server room around you
dwd
Ge0rG, Lies.
dwd
Ge0rG, And/or a clone.
Ge0rG
maybe your server is an evil twin now.
Ellenor Malik
"Only I have access." Only true if you built the processor, hard disk, and everything yourself.
Ge0rG
or maybe the evil twin was in Brussels indeed, and told people embarassing stories about the origins of your na,e✎
Ge0rG
or maybe the evil twin was in Brussels indeed, and told people embarassing stories about the origins of your name ✏
jonas’
Ellenor Malik, so you can’t trust the client either. Your argument is invalid.
dwd
Ellenor Malik, OK, but the same goes for your client device, so you're saying nobody can trust anything, and we may as well all go home.
jonas’
^5, dwd
Ellenor Malik
> jonas’ has written:
> Ellenor Malik, so you can’t trust the client either. Your argument is invalid.
to be clear, the first part does not imply the second part
Ellenor Malik
it's best to trust as few links as possible
dwd
Ellenor Malik, Yes, I agree, keep the attack surface low etc. I just suggested that there were cases where the risk to the client device was higher than the risk to the server.
dwd
Ellenor Malik, Certainly not true in all cases.
Ellenor Malik
encrypt everything to the best of your ability
dwd
Ellenor Malik, Encryption doesn't solve any problems, though, it just moves problems around.
Daniel
If the BND can't trust their servers they probably have bigger issues
dwd
Daniel, Right, that.
dwd
Daniel, Well. Actually it's not that simple. But they probably trust the server more than the clients at least.
Ellenor Malik
assuming you can partially trust the endpoints, encryption makes problems smaller
pep.
Ellenor Malik, "it depends"
pep.
on the making problems smaller part
Daniel
Also something something accountability
dwd
Ellenor Malik, No, I disagree. The BND might not even trust its *users* as much as its server.
mukt2has left
Marandahas left
lovetox
what is the idea behind
Marandahas joined
lovetox
<conference xmlns='urn:xmpp:bookmarks:1'/> is a valid bookmark?
lovetox
why would someone publish this, and what should i do with that if i receive it
dwd
lovetox, The pubsub item id gives you the jid, remember.
lovetox
ahh
lovetox
kk thanks
dwd
lovetox, So probably quite obvious if you actually see it in the wild.
edhelashas left
edhelashas joined
LNJhas left
mukt2has joined
LNJhas joined
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
krauqhas joined
calvinhas left
lovetoxhas left
LNJhas left
LNJhas joined
mathijshas left
mathijshas joined
calvinhas joined
mathijshas left
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
lovetoxhas joined
Nekithas left
calvinhas left
mukt2has left
Steve Killehas left
Maxhas left
goffihas left
mukt2has joined
debaclehas joined
lovetoxhas left
lovetoxhas joined
Maxhas joined
pdurbinhas joined
eevvoorhas left
Steve Killehas joined
LNJhas left
nyco-2has joined
LNJhas joined
mathijshas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
pdurbinhas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
rionhas left
rionhas joined
calvinhas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
Dele Olajidehas joined
mathijshas left
larmahas left
mukt2has left
mukt2has joined
mathijshas joined
waqashas joined
Nekithas joined
larmahas joined
Dele Olajidehas left
sonnyhas left
mathijshas left
lovetoxhas left
Marchas left
Marchas joined
mukt2has left
mathijshas joined
Yagizahas left
paulhas left
Marchas left
Marchas joined
lovetoxhas joined
lovetoxhas left
lovetoxhas joined
calvinhas left
calvinhas joined
wojtekhas joined
adiaholichas left
wojtekhas left
Wojtekhas left
paulhas joined
Wojtekhas joined
calvinhas left
Nekithas left
nyco-2has left
nyco-2has joined
nyco-2has left
sonnyhas joined
Tobiashas left
karoshihas left
karoshihas joined
lovetoxhas left
LNJhas left
greenhive-jphas joined
pdurbinhas joined
greenhive-jphas left
pdurbinhas left
debaclehas left
Douglas Terabytehas left
Wojtekhas left
paulhas left
moparisthebest
vanitasvitae: (re: a/v) not even an Android phone or any laptop with internet and jitsi meet?
vanitasvitae
moparisthebest: we could try that, but I doubt it will be as good as Cisco's teleconferencing.