What does /g/ think about Cryptocat? Does anyone use this?

>>57614552
dumb and gay and you're advertising should be a bannable offense.

Fuck, I just wanted to ask this exect qustion.

I used cryptocat for a couple months for general chat/IM purposes back when it was browser-only. It was pretty good, I liked it a lot. Nice, simple design and no bloat. The personal verification was a little tedious and buggy but I guess that's necessary if you want "security" - although noone really gave a single fuck in my small group of friends who used it, we just chose nicknames which we would recognize each other by.

Haven't tried the downloadable desktop app yet.

File: pauline.jpg (33KB, 620x372px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 620x372px

>>57614749
>dumb
Please explain?

bump

Has anyone tried the desktop version?

>>57614552
>Nadim K.
The browser version was a case study in fucking up your crypto. He was trying, but oh my GOD.

He had the good grace at least to try again and then when it was clear he was onto a dead end, quite properly pulled the plug.

The new version apparently uses some variant of Axolotl (earlier version of Signal protocol) and so I would not expect to be anywhere near as awful, but I haven't actually reviewed it or anything, and the devil's in the implementation.

He is well-meaning I think, but I have questions about his competence. The less of it he actually did himself, the better it's likely to be is my initial guess.

(Avoiding the trip code on this one because I don't want him shitposting at me on Twitter any more than he does already, lol.)

icon is cute.

>>57618116
I don't think so. I like Unicon more.