Important progress has been made regarding bringing MLS end-to-end encryption to the ActivityPub protocol, with developers already building implementations and providing feedback to a future version of the protocol spec.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Matrix is not really integrated into the ActivityPub protocol the same way DMs usually are. I would have to open a separate application to message you on Matrix, I can’t just click on your profile and shoot you a DM (or can I?).

[–] knova@infosec.pub 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You cannot, two totally different protocols

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 7 points 1 day ago

There you go. So I think adding DMs to ActivityPub would add an extra level of convenience

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean, there's nothing technically stopping one app supporting both protocols natively, especially since Lemmy already includes a field for people's profiles to link their Matrix ID. Though to my knowledge none do it yet.

[–] knova@infosec.pub 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sure, in the same way there is nothing stopping Lemmy from using ATProto. The problem is all competing standards and what the developer chooses to use.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 7 hours ago

Perhaps, but I'm describing something slightly different. Your description is basically "one platform supporting two protocols that basically do the same thing". I'm talking more about "one app that has two separate-but-related bits of functionality, each using the more appropriate protocol for that job".

[–] Steve@communick.news -2 points 1 day ago

ActivityPub is only one of a number of federated protocols.
One notably unsuited to instant messaging.