cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/7363991

While Jitsi is open-source, most people use the platform they provide, meet.jit.si, for immediate conference calls. They have now introduced a “Know Your Customer” policy and require at least one of the attendees to log in with a Facebook, Github (Microsoft), or Google account.

One option to avoid this is to self-host, but then you’ll be identifiable via your domain and have to maintain a server.

As a true alternative to Jitsi, there’s jami.net. It is a decentralized conference app, free open-source, and account creation is optional. It’s available for all major platforms (Mac, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android), including on F-Droid.

  • garrett@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Short answer is that a lot of privacy-focused tools get abused like hell and put these companies in an untenable position. It sounds like Jitsi had something fairly bad happening that would’ve put them in a regulatory pinch.

    • CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But the companies chosen for login is a slap in the face of anyone who cares about privacy.

      If it is e2e encrypted, why would this change mitigate what they are concerned about?

      • garrett@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Slap in the face” is a bit dramatic when this doesn’t impact the truly private version of this software, the version you host on a system you control.

        I’m also not sure what end-to-end encryption has to do with this since preventing the sign up of an abusive user essentially addresses the issue. It’s probably not something they’d wanna do but I’d wager they were getting some subpoenas and/or warrants that they couldn’t provide much information for and LEOs were ratcheting up pressure. Unfortunately, the legal side of tech is more than “ha ha can’t do that, officer”.