Guide : quelle messagerie sécurisée choisir ? - ►http://www.numerama.com/tech/169095-guide-quelle-messagerie-securisee-choisir.html …pic.twitter.com/EtuFqwNEQH
▻https://twitter.com/Numerama/status/731544984340533249
Guide : quelle messagerie sécurisée choisir ? - ►http://www.numerama.com/tech/169095-guide-quelle-messagerie-securisee-choisir.html …pic.twitter.com/EtuFqwNEQH
– BBM
– WhatsApp
– iMessage
– Hangout
– Telegram
– Signal
voir aussi ▻http://seenthis.net/messages/308897
pour le guide de l’EFF (mais qui est en train d’être refait)
Ancienne version : ►https://www.eff.org/node/82654
Secure messaging scorecard
A rather elaborate overview of all those messaging apps out there, presented in a scorecard so you can quickly check which tools actually keep your messages safe (+), and in what way.
▻https://www.eff.org/secure-messaging-scorecard
Most of the tools that are easy for the general public to use don’t rely on security best practices—including end-to-end encryption and open source code. Messaging tools that are really secure often aren’t easy to use; everyday users may have trouble installing the technology, verifying its authenticity, setting up an account, or may accidentally use it in ways that expose their communications.
[...]
The Secure Messaging Scorecard examines dozens of messaging technologies and rates each of them on a range of security best practices. Our campaign is focused on communication technologies — including chat clients, text messaging apps, email applications, and video calling technologies. These are the tools everyday users need to communicate with friends, family members, and colleagues, and we need secure solutions for them.
(+) Updated: Please also check the comments below and do not take that scorecard simply at face value, as the security community has some relevant criticism on it.
Old version : ►https://www.eff.org/node/82654
Three big limits: 1) There is nothing about the metadata (who talks to who), an important problem since many of these services are, unlike standard-based techniques like SMTP and XMPP, very centralized: the provider has all the metadata. 2) The “audited” column is almost meaningless since it allows unpublished audits. Not only it means we have to trust blindly the auditor, but it also means we do not know the perimeter of the audit, the tests actually performed, etc. 3) No mention of centralized dependencies (like TextSecure on Google Play).
the scorecard stoked a wave of criticism from several prominent figures in the security industry, who deemed the effort inaccurate, misleading, and vague.
Peter Eckersley, the EFF technology projects director, defended the scorecard to the Daily Dot and said it was just “the first phase of an ongoing campaign for secure and usable cryptography.”
Since when is "just" an excuse for “incorrect” ?
It’s easy to see why #CryptoCat ’s perfect score is being criticized heavily: The program has a problematic history of broken security, crackable keys, and a variety of attacks.
▻http://www.dailydot.com/politics/eff-secure-messaging-scorecard-critics
Guide : quelle messagerie sécurisée choisir ?
▻http://seenthis.net/messages/489305