How does White Noise address criticisms surrounding Nostr's implementation[1]:

> While nostr offers the ability to send encrypted DMs to user pubkeys, the metadata of these messages are broadcast publicly via relays. This is the same as a bitcoin transaction being viewable on the public ledger. The contents of the direct message will be encrypted, but other metadata like the sender and recipient can be viewed by anyone.

Even assuming if metadata is encrypted, does WN's implementation broadcast messages across public relays?

If you can map out social networks based on publicly available data, can tell if one user messages another, or correlate when messages were sent to/from whom, I would not call that private.

[1] https://ron.stoner.com/nostr_Security_and_Privacy/

As someone who used to be in the Secure Scuttlebutt community an now works on OpenMLS, I wonder how they (you?) deal with concurrency of Commit messages. I spent quite some time thinking about ways to detect and resolve forks, and the current iteration of MLS doesn't really have good answers here.

I've only been able to find this coverage on the Blossom thing: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/blossom-intro/

firstly: i think the only way secure p2p messaging can work is if its decentralised. no 3rd parties to communication, how this would be done i have no idea. maybe like email but without the server?

secondly: you'd need to ensure a secure os on each end that you can trust to not take screenshots and send to hq before transmission or after reception.

since its not possible to use the internet without a source ip. its almost provably insecure (in terms of privacy), no matter what protocols are dreamed up. a 3rd party will have to be trusted to distribute packets. and thats the weak point. (unless you force the source IP to be 0.0.0.0 or something before it goes out)

couldnt we just use dns to point to recipients, force zero the source ip and send udp packets directly?

what about pgp through a tor relay?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609