Out of curiosity, how do you know the poster you are replying to is 'demanding e2ee without fully understanding'? Also wondering what you mean by 'really good' encryption?
Because such posters are always the same and make similar requests all the time. Say, someone makes a group chat product for 10000 people. They always pop up: 'but does it have e2ee? no? meh'. Not understanding that real e2ee makes no sense if you just blindly trust everyone without fingerprint verification, which is clearly impossible if you plan to use a product with thousands of people whom you've never met before.
By 'really good' encryption I mean encryption where you do mutual fingerprint verification - a tiresome process that few users really do because they don't want all this hassle. Most people would be more happy with a big green button with a nice lock which says, 'You are really safe now' after pressing.
On HN, of all places, I personally prefer to give posters the benefit of the doubt that when asking for E2EE, they have some notion of what it is and entails. Your past few comments here are really rather condescending, assuming that no one (except yourself, of course) really understands what they mean when they ask for E2EE.
>real e2ee
>By 'really good' encryption
These are descriptive terms I've not encountered in an academic setting when discussing all types of encryption. Is there a formal definition of 'real' vs. 'fake' E2EE?
