[Standards] OMEMO and Olm

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Thu May 25 09:12:46 UTC 2017

On 25 May 2017 at 10:01, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
> On 25.05.2017 10:56, Dave Cridland wrote:
>> On 25 May 2017 at 08:26, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
>>> On 25.05.2017 08:04, Remko Tronçon wrote:
>>>> On 24 May 2017 at 22:55, Andreas Straub <andy at strb.org
>>>> <mailto:andy at strb.org>> wrote:
>>>>> I just don't see the major implementations switching over any time soon
>>>> I have serious doubts that at least one of them won't have to do *some*
>>>> significant work to get rid of the libsignal dependency to be legally in
>>>> order, which will mean implementing the ratchet and XEdDSA itself
>>>> (unless a library emerges that implements this all from scratch).
>>> Why do you think the existing implementations using libsignal are not
>>> legally in order?
>> I think Smack, while legally in order, is in trouble here.
> Thanks Dave, but Remko's statement reads like *every* OMEMO
> implementation based on libsignal is legally not in order. Which is a
> pretty strong claim, and is borderline, or at least gives the impression
> of spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt.

I did not read Remko's statement in that way.


More information about the Standards mailing list