it seems clear that i dont have enough on the project to convince/inspire confidence in you, which is understandable and respectable. i dont want you to “trust me bro”… its why i keep the open-source versions separate, its useful to be able to point to open source examples when discussing details online as i refine the implementation. you should use what you are comfortable with and you clearly know your way around cybersecurity, so i expect your judgement in how you securely communicate is better than most.
So is it about convenience, or security?
it isnt about convenience or security. while security is clearly important, the “convienience” is important for helping users to get started. from experience, pointing to a github repo is simply not enough. it has to be easy for users to get started. convinience and security both need a great deal of attention. the quality of either is dependent how much time i put into them.
expect users to audit…
i dont expect users to audit the code. at this stage in the project when im still putting it together, i can confirm this code isnt good enough to audit… third-party audits are important to have, but they are prohibitively expensive so dont expect one any time soon.
There’s nothing the browser can do to protect its data if the OS falls into the hands of an attacker
thats just wrong. its possible to combine the filesystem api and the crypto api. a previous post on the matter: https://programming.dev/post/33435342 … in this app i have a working version of passkey-encryption-at-rest. so a user has to register a passkey on their device and all the data is then encrypted at rest in indexedDB… users didnt like that every time they reload the page, the webapp was asking for a fingerprint to unlock… so that feature is disabled for now untill i make it so it can be disabled if the user wants. there is much more to think about there and that could be a whole separate discussion as we consider things like devices supporting passkeys PRF and how “recovery” could work.
censor your app
the frontend (this project), the backend (peerjs-server) and stun/turn servers can be selfhosted. but that moves away from what i can offer. id also like to investigate options for onion-style routing which the stray further from “minimal infrastructure” of p2p commmunication. https://programming.dev/post/41521230
low latency/high bandwidth the protocol was designed for
ive been working on this project for a while. it started off as a p2p messaging framework. i created a simple video calling app and the functionality naturally started leaning towards file transfer and messaging. the logical progression of the framework was to wrap it in a messaging app where you would want low latency/high bandwidth video calls and file transfer. these functionalities are in contrast to tasks like moving files between computers using some cloud service.
people need to stay fae away when security is involved
ive had this kind of fear-mongering/gatekeeping a lot in the cyber security community. its understandable to have high standard and expectation for things like security. but if kerhof’s principles are worth anything, they would apply to this project. in the open source version the concept is resonably demonstrated and there is documentation about how it works on the website. spicier things like “how the crytography works” are actively discussed online (like this). its clear that the code is too complicated for anyone to use their spare time review, buts its at least an option. i have recieved good feedback and iterated over what you see.
For anyone reading this thread looking for a secure chat app, just use Delta Chat, or even Signal (which has some issues, but it’s better than nothing).
agreed. my project is far from finished.
i mentioned it in the post. ‘Im aiming to create the “theoretically” most secure messaging app’… that is the goal. im not aiming for “more secure that whatsapp/signal”… but something fundamentally different in how it works. while things like webrtc and interest decentralized technology has been around for a long time, there wasnt something as general-purpose like what im aiming for.
it started as a sideproject and i kept building on it. i hope to make money out of it and have something that can support me (because ya know… bills to pay). i started off open source; naively thinking i would get open-source funding support if i demonstrated the concept to develop it further. i did several exhausting rounds of grant applications. it was an horrible experience on something outside my competence and towards the end i was dreading applying for grants knowing that they were going to reject my project. i also set up github sponsors, but nobody has donated… completely understandable for something that looks like a weekend project, but its clear that it isnt going to pay any bills.
you are fear-mongering again… its important for anyone reading this, the app works differently with user data. its all client-side. you dont need to add any personal info for it to work. ive linked how the data can be encrypted at rest. there are irresponsible ways to use any app, your data is not inherently at risk because of this implementation. if you are going to make such claims, you should make it against the code examples i’ve provided… or at least an example of what could go wrong.
i work hard on this project, so of course i promote the project on reddit and the fediverse, but you failed to mention that i also advise caution in all of my posts (including this). i hope its clear that such wording like “work-in-progress” works against marketing/promoting… i include it because its responsible to do on a project like this at its current stage.
its 2026 and AI is very prominent. people are indeed vibcoding some serious stuff. there is clearly a new wave of “developers” that dont have a concept of unit-testing, let alone the appriciation for them. ive been a developer for 10+ years and know how to do this “old-school”, but using AI is clearly a huge enhacement so it understandably looks very vibecoded. its important to study, test and review what is produced. when people get hung up on “OmG YoU’rE UsInG AI”, that seems to be an indicator for me that im not really having a real discussion. especially when i have code examples and unit tests… that doesnt mean my approach is without issues, but the code is right there. your concerns are well placed so i have some questions for you.
while you have no obligation to do anything for me, my point is that the code has been openly discussed for a while and other people have reached out about issues and i addressed them to get the project to where it is now. i have a lot more to do on the project before i can remove wording like “work-in-progress” in my communication about the project. the project is working as expected and i expect it will continue to improve.