Why SimpleX network needs to use a decentralized blockchain to achieve growth: 1. To make servers and groups sustainable. As EVM blockchains (Ethereum etc.) added support for zero-knowledge proofs, smart contracts seem a good fit for secure payments for server capacity. 🧵 (1/7)
2. To provide short memorable names that users, groups, and channels can use as their addresses – it's impossible to do with the current model of decentralization without servers being able to MITM the connection, it requires a network-wide consensus about what names mean. (2/7)
3. For a larger choice of servers by default. Now SimpleX apps offer two operators, and users can choose their own servers. It's not good enough. We aim to have 100s of network operators available to all users. Blockchain will provide a public server registry. (3/7)
For any information requiring network-wide consensus, smart contracts not controlled by any party offer a better alternative than a central authority that decentralized networks have to introduce as they grow (e.g., Tor). (4/7)
Some of you may equate all blockchain tech with scams, but it's as wrong as saying that only criminals need privacy. The technology is neutral. People make it good or bad. (5/7)
In the same way as it is wrong to build messaging on blockchain (some people tried), it would be wrong to re-invent solutions for problems that require network-wide consensus. EVM blockchains provide a solid and secure foundation to build these parts. (6/7)
Suspend your disbelief, and follow our journey - we will be adopting EVM blockchains in a way nobody has done before, focussing on our core mission: freedom, security and privacy of your communications. (7/7)
A fantastic video by #mentaloutlaw explaining SimpleX network design better than we do:
Thank you so much for producing it 🙏
We have some important comments: 🧵
1. Nerds love to present information security as a way to avoid law enforcement – it's a cypherpunk cliche – but 1) it cannot be further from our goals, and 2) cypherpunk stories are used by surveillance lobbyists against the right of people to privacy and security from data criminals.
2. SimpleX design protects its users from crime and protects children from sexual abuse that happens a lot on non-private platforms. Criminals can't discover users, and it makes users safe, reducing crime – many families use SimpleX for that reason.
But there is no existing solution for using the same profile on multiple devices without compromising security more than we're comfortable with. In time, we will find a better balance for UX/security than now and then what is offered elsewhere. 🧵
Why don't we just do what Signal / WhatsApp do? They, effectively, convert each direct conversation into a group. This approach has some solvable and some unsolvable problems:
1. Adding device does not show notification to the user, and can be used as an attack vector (). This problem is solvable, and we hope to see Signal and WhatsApp solving it.eprint.iacr.org/2021/626.pdf
by @securemess is the great comparison of messaging apps, but there are several incorrect statements about @SimpleXChat there. Commenting in thread 🧵below.securemessagingapps.com
1. Main reasons why the app isn't recommended: Provide a transparency report
It is available online and updated at least quarterly, or if anything changes: simplex.chat/transparency/
2. Company jurisdiction: UK
We disagree that there are any jurisdictions that are particularly good for privacy.
Also, this might important for centralised services, like Threema, where the users can't host servers, and much less important for decentralized network, such as SimpleX, where there are hundreds (if not thousands) of servers that we don't control.