SimplifiedPrivacy.com Podcast on Nostr: Pro/con for each encrypted messenger XMPP: Pro: Speed & Decentralization. Easy to ...

Pro/con for each encrypted messenger

XMPP:
Pro: Speed & Decentralization. Easy to self-host
Con: Low adoption & reliant on government DNS

Matrix:
Pro: Institutional adoption
Con: Decentralized in theory, but centralized in practice to the matrix.org server with Google captchas. Like XMPP, it uses Government DNS

Session:
Pro: Uncensored Identity with onion routed delivery
Con: No rotating keys & despite rising adoption of the messenger, their cryptocurrency is dramatically falling in price, which relays have to stake

SimpleX:
Pro: Anonymous identity for each conversation, your identity is not tied to any one server, and you can self-host.
Con: No multi-device sync. No backup of account if you lose the physical device. Group chats don’t scale. You have to manually find and add servers not hosted by the developer.

Briar:
Pro: Uncensored identity, no servers, Direct Peer to Peer onion routed on Tor, or works without internet via bluetooth
Cons: Other person has to be online. No phone calls. While open source, keep in mind the CIA made Briar for foreign regime change.

Keet:
Pro: Uncensored identity, no servers, peer to peer like Briar, and it’s great for video chat and large file transfers
Con: Like Briar, the other person has to be online, but unlike Briar, Keet won’t connect over Tor.

Signal:
Pro: Easy to use, wide adoption
Con: Centralized Amazon server, no self-hosting, identity is connected to government phones which leaks metadata and can be censored. “Sealed Sender” has been academically proven to leak metadata unless you turn off “read receipts”. Group chats leak phone numbers if members accept new incoming messages.