User-to-user direct video chat, encrypted?

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by Cubytus, Mar 15, 2016.

  1. Cubytus macrumors 65816

    Mar 2, 2007
    Hi to all,

    this is a general question to know if anyone would know about an easy solution that would allow one user to video-chat with another, encrypting the video (mandatory), using a direct connection (for lower latency). Of course, the chosen solution must not rely on any external service for relaying video, and mustn't include any backdoor (so Skype is excluded).

    Reason: I have a very privacy-conscious gf, and we're both tired of using the cell phone with its crappy audio.

    I understand that Jitsi video relay gets pretty close to what I want, but it 1- requires complete access to a high performance server (not usable on shared hosting) 2- is actively relaying video, and by design, must decrypt it on the server before encrypting it back to send to the intended respondent.

    What would you suggest?
  2. chown33 macrumors 604

    Aug 9, 2009
    So many bees
    iMessages and FaceTime calls are your business, not ours. Your communications are protected by end-to-end encryption across all your devices when you use iMessage and FaceTime, and with iOS and watchOS, your iMessages are also encrypted on your device in such a way that they can’t be accessed without your passcode. Apple has no way to decrypt iMessage and FaceTime data when it’s in transit between devices. So unlike other companies’ messaging services, Apple doesn’t scan your communications, and we wouldn’t be able to comply with a wiretap order even if we wanted to. While we do back up iMessage and SMS messages for your convenience using iCloud Backup, you can turn it off whenever you want. And we don’t store FaceTime calls on any servers.
  3. sdilley14 macrumors 65816

    Feb 8, 2007
    Mesa, AZ
    Are you communicating over webcam or over the phone?

    I'm wondering if you could set up some sort of ad-hoc, 1 to 1 type connection/network with the other user/users? I did some Googling on ad-hoc video conferencing and there are a number of different options. I would think that an ad hoc network would be more secure than a more open service like Skype?
  4. Cubytus thread starter macrumors 65816

    Mar 2, 2007
    This would be over a webcam, and the ideal solution would work in Windows (No Apple at her house), without having to register an account.
  5. freeskier93 macrumors 6502

    Jul 13, 2008
  6. Cubytus thread starter macrumors 65816

    Mar 2, 2007
    Heh, nope :) Just regular people concerned about unlawful interception of communications. Besides, having to repeat sentences twice or thrice over the phone because of crappy phones / reception quality / headsets (or any combination of these) quickly becomes tiring, especially after a long working shift spent, you guessed it, talking to customers.

    FaceTime is currently not feasible because she has no Apple device, Jitsi isn't perfect in regards to privacy. FWIW, video is not as important as top audio quality. But I guessed it would be nice to finally find some use for the webcam. I probably haven't turned it on more than 10 times since I purchased this computer, 4 years ago.
  7. grahamperrin macrumors 601


    Jun 8, 2007
  8. Cubytus thread starter macrumors 65816

    Mar 2, 2007
    Interesting, though I don't understand some parts:

    a user will need a client software, and a server software. Server can either be from Spreed.ME itself, or through a user's own server
    But a username has to be registered over to Spreed.ME in both cases?

    And the privacy policy is somewhat ambiguous:
    You also agree that the Service cannot be used to store, upload, or publish any sensitive information about yourself such as matters of race, ethnic background, religion, philosophical conviction, health, sexuality, labor union membership, criminal offences, social problems and other strictly private issues.
    How could they verify such content isn't shared as the service is supposedly encrypted?
  9. 0007776 Suspended


    Jul 11, 2006
    They can't, but it at least in theory covers them legally if you go against that and it comes out somehow like through hackers.

Share This Page