Blockchain-based decentralized messengers: a privacy dream?

As people across the globe become more aware of their privacy rights and how they are constantly being violated by various prominent social media platforms, the demand for tangible, decentralized alternatives continues to grow rapidly.

In the long run, in 2019, Facebook was ordered to pay an incredible $5 billion fine by the FTC Improper access to private data Up to 87 million users.Just a year later, the social media giant had to take out Another $550 million went to settle a privacy lawsuit that said the company illegally collected customer data, including their biometrics and personal details, without their explicit consent.

Such breaches help fuel demand for transparency-driven social media services, especially decentralized messengers, that provide users with a high degree of data security. In this regard, XX Messenger, a new quantum-resistant, privacy-focused messaging app developed by cryptographer David Chaum — Recently entered the market. The application has a global decentralized network of 350 nodes, and each operator receives the platform’s native XX coins as an incentive for their efforts.

A quantum-resistant messenger would be resistant to most currently known decryption methods, theoretically preventing the possibility of a quantum computer being used to hack user communications.

Incentives for Blockchain-Based Messengers

Guy Goldenberg, CEO of MultiNFT, a metaverse-based social media network, told Cointelegraph that demand for decentralized messaging services is driven by two key accelerators: users looking for censorship-resistant applications, and when it Lack of trust in centralized providers when it emerges. Involves privacy and data protection. He said:

“Users have recently expressed growing concerns when it comes to ownership of their freedom of speech and data rights, and with the help of decentralized chat apps, a solution seems to be on the horizon — a platform that users own instead of a single Small group of executives, no single party can control opinions or censor participants.”

Independent blockchain analyst and social media influencer Scott Cunningham told Cointelegraph that the core claim made by decentralized messaging platforms is that they provide users with an end-to-end encryption solution to ensure consumer anonymity and a high degree of privacy sex. To reinforce his point, he shared a recent unpleasant experience with Facebook Messenger:

“I sent myself a letter [meant to be read later by me] Only to find out that Facebook is monitoring messages sent to me and removing them for violating community rules. Once someone experiences firsthand that every word they say is tracked and evaluated in real-time, they feel even more compelled to act. “

The downside is pretty real

While decentralized messengers could theoretically protect the privacy of the masses, blockchain technology itself could be a barrier to adoption.

Ingo Rübe, founder of blockchain-based identity network Kilt Protocol, points out that decentralized messengers require real-time relay and storage capabilities because it is highly unrealistic for recipients to be online when someone texts them. “A possible solution would be to use a random single blockchain node as a relay, but it might not be reliable,” he admitted.

In terms of network upgrades, the use of blockchain technology creates more problems, Goldenberg said. “Updates to blockchain systems are rarely backward compatible, and sometimes there can be issues where the product may not survive,” Goldenberg added.

Yung Beef, content lead and community manager at Subsocial, a decentralized social networking platform based on Polkadot, told Cointelegraph that one of the biggest hurdles is transaction fees, adding:

“We’re already trying to create a social networking platform with transaction fees, and with how many people are messaging each other, I’m not sure it’s really going to work.”

While he admits that Subsocial is actively looking for ways to implement a private messaging module, the challenges are so severe that the vision is a bit of a pipe dream. “We are working on ways to lock down the SUB [the platform’s native crypto token] Get a certain amount of free transactions per day, but that still doesn’t solve the problem of some people sending thousands of messages a day,” he added.

A similar sentiment was expressed by Rübe, who told Cointelegraph that decentralized messaging services faced multiple challenges from the start, starting with the high cost of placing messages on the blockchain. Even if they did get on the network, they wouldn’t be very secure because anyone with access to the system could easily read them.

Alexander Klus, founder of decentralized content-sharing platform Creton, told Cointelegraph that a fully functional, viable blockchain messenger is a very difficult problem to solve, noting that existing platforms, such as Etherscan’s messaging service, are very centralized. Even the official Ethereum messenger, Status, includes a degree of centralization in order to scale better, he said, adding:

“Choosing a platform like Signal as a messaging platform is the best because it has very good encryption. Also, the persistence of messaging isn’t a big deal, or something that most users don’t even want.”

Another major issue is adoption, as most of the decentralized products that currently exist in the space simply cannot compete with the giants they face, such as Telegram, WhatsApp, and WeChat. Goldenberg said:

“Users have a habitual way of doing things, and new platforms need viral accelerators to adopt because they require massive migration, which is almost impossible. You see, for a chat app to be useful, you need all ( or most) contacts use it, and that takes time, marketing and willingness.”

Is there a middle ground to be found?

While popular privacy apps including Signal and Telegram claim to use end-to-end encryption, or client-server encryption, to handle user privacy very carefully, the former is only as secure as it is encoded. In response, Chaum pointed out that messages from these platforms could theoretically still be cracked and decoded by powerful computers if they were not permanently deleted.

So going forward, it will be interesting to see whether developers can come up with blockchain-powered messaging services that offer the same degree of functional and operational flexibility as their centralized counterparts, while being able to solve the problem of high transaction fees. A long-term and practical way.