It’s ok for most encrypted protocols (In salty you can fetch other messages but can’t decrypt). Btw i think recipient can be removed so if someone seen message they tried to decypt, if can’t - its not message to you

@doesnm@doesnm.p.psf.lt That’s actually not true, because you’d have to know the target you’re interested in, in the first place. Inboxes in Salty.IM are deliberately shahed for this reason. So whilst you may know your own inbox address, etc, I (as an arbitrary bad actor) wouldn’t easily be able to guess (let alone brute force) my way to another inbox address of an interested party.

It is not possible to remove it, otherwise you do not know that the message is for you. With that information you can’t decrypt.

I made a draft of an “encrypted public messenger”, which was basically a Feed for an address derivate from the public ket, let’s say ‘abcd..eaea’

Anyone could check, “are there any messages for my address?” and you get a whole list of timestamps and encrypted stuff.

Inside the encrypted message is a signature from the sender. That way you ‘could’ block spam.

Only the owner of the private key could see who sent what, and so…

And even with that my concussion was that users expectations for a private IM might be far away from my experiment.

here are a few ideas you might take into consideration when designing a secure IM https://developer.virgilsecurity.com/docs/e3kit/fundamentals/secure-instant-messaging/

Obviously if you’ve worked on something similar, you already know it, he

It’s nice to see we’re all largely thinking along the same lines. e.g: Salty.im 😅