NNCPNET is a new peer-to-peer, offline-first email network designed for resilience and privacy. Leveraging end-to-end encryption and store-and-forward messaging via sneakernet (physical media like USB drives) or opportunistic network connections, it aims to bypass traditional internet infrastructure. Users generate their own cryptographic keys and can exchange messages directly or through intermediary nodes. While still early in development, NNCPNET offers a potential alternative for communication in situations where internet access is unreliable, censored, or unavailable.
Signal's cryptography is generally well-regarded, using established and vetted protocols like X3DH and Double Ratchet for secure messaging. The blog post author reviewed Signal's implementation and found it largely sound, praising the clarity of the documentation and the overall design. While some minor theoretical improvements were suggested, like using a more modern key derivation function (HKDF over SHA-256) and potentially exploring post-quantum cryptography for future-proofing, the author concludes that Signal's current cryptographic choices are robust and secure, offering strong confidentiality and integrity protections for users.
Hacker News users discussed the Signal cryptography review, mostly agreeing with the author's points. Several highlighted the importance of Signal's Double Ratchet algorithm and the trade-offs involved in achieving strong security while maintaining usability. Some questioned the practicality of certain theoretical attacks, emphasizing the difficulty of exploiting them in the real world. Others discussed the value of formal verification efforts and the overall robustness of Signal's protocol design despite minor potential vulnerabilities. The conversation also touched upon the importance of accessible security audits and the challenges of maintaining privacy in messaging apps.
This guide emphasizes minimizing digital traces for protesters through practical smartphone security advice. It recommends using a secondary, "burner" phone dedicated to protests, ideally a basic model without internet connectivity. If using a primary smartphone, strong passcodes/biometrics, full-disk encryption, and up-to-date software are crucial. Minimizing data collection involves disabling location services, microphone access for unnecessary apps, and using privacy-respecting alternatives to default apps like Signal for messaging and a privacy-focused browser. During protests, enabling airplane mode or using Faraday bags is advised. The guide also covers digital threat models, stressing the importance of awareness and preparedness for potential surveillance and data breaches.
Hacker News users discussed the practicality and necessity of the guide's recommendations for protesters. Some questioned the threat model, arguing that most protesters wouldn't be targeted by sophisticated adversaries. Others pointed out that basic digital hygiene practices are beneficial for everyone, regardless of protest involvement. Several commenters offered additional tips, like using a burner phone or focusing on physical security. The effectiveness of GrapheneOS was debated, with some praising its security while others questioned its usability for average users. A few comments highlighted the importance of compartmentalization and using separate devices for different activities.
Summary of Comments ( 3 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43802792
HN commenters generally express interest in NNCPNET, praising its decentralized and resilient design as a potential alternative to centralized email providers. Some raise concerns about usability and setup complexity, questioning the practicality for non-technical users. Several discuss the potential for spam and abuse, with suggestions for moderation or reputation systems. Others highlight the project's reliance on Usenet technology, debating its suitability and expressing hope for future improvements. A few users compare NNCPNET to other decentralized messaging systems, noting its unique features like offline message passing and end-to-end encryption. The project's early stage of development is acknowledged, with comments expressing anticipation for its progress and potential impact on online communication.
The Hacker News post titled "The NNCPNET Email Network" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43802792) discussing the announcement of the NNCPNET email network has generated a moderate amount of discussion, with several commenters expressing interest in the project and its potential implications.
A recurring theme in the comments is the desire for a more decentralized and resilient email system. Commenters express frustration with the current centralized nature of email and the associated privacy and censorship concerns. NNCPNET, with its peer-to-peer architecture, is seen as a potential solution to these issues. Some commenters draw parallels to other decentralized messaging systems, highlighting the potential for increased robustness and resistance to single points of failure.
Several commenters delve into the technical aspects of NNCPNET, discussing its use of UUCP and the implications for message delivery and routing. There are questions about scalability and the practical challenges of managing a distributed network of this nature. Some express concerns about the potential for spam and abuse in a decentralized system and inquire about the mechanisms in place to mitigate these risks.
The security aspects of NNCPNET are also a topic of conversation. Commenters discuss the encryption methods employed and the potential vulnerabilities of a peer-to-peer system. There's interest in understanding how NNCPNET handles key management and authentication to ensure secure communication.
While some commenters express skepticism about the viability of NNCPNET as a mainstream email solution, many acknowledge its potential as a valuable tool for specific use cases, such as secure communication in environments with limited internet access or for individuals prioritizing privacy and censorship resistance. There is a general sentiment of cautious optimism, with commenters expressing a desire to see the project develop further and address the technical and practical challenges it faces.
A few commenters also discuss the historical context of UUCP and its role in early computer networks, drawing parallels between the motivations behind NNCPNET and the early days of the internet. This historical perspective adds another layer to the discussion and highlights the cyclical nature of innovation in communication technologies.