• EngineerGaming
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    If a backdoor is forced to be added into any project, wouldn’t someone be able to fork it and go on without the backdoor? Maybe even the original dev incognito…

    • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Theoretically, yes. But if it’s a legal entity that added it, they can easily circumvent any attempt to eradicate it. Or, in a more extreme way, criminalize FOSS chat apps altogether, then the code will have to be analyzed in a RE environment. Maybe the non FOSS server code is where the backdoor is added. There are so many relatively hidden ways to compromise a chat app’s supply chain.

      • EngineerGaming
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I doubt any FOSS restriction is doable at all. As for the supply chain - xz showed this is indeed possible… But no one can guarantee that every encrypted client would be able to get such a well-hidden backdoor, and that it will stay undiscovered, and that it wouldn’t be invalidated with an update… But yeah, the only way this can be combatted is having more eyes on such software.

        • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I agree with you. I just don’t think “they” will take that fact and just sit with it. I think “they” will do everything they can to get multiple backdoors in there (and I use the term ‘backdoor’ loosely to mean anything that can programmatically circumvent the encryption). There are more of them, in terms of power and funding, than there are of us. They will eventually succeed, if only for short times each interval. That’s why I wrote that the solution is a chat revolution. I don’t know what that will look like, but we need something they can’t successfully attack.

          Edit: autocorrect