←back to thread

123 points geerlingguy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
xtajv ◴[] No.45394666[source]
It pains me to mention this but I don't think it's responsible not to: https://github.com/meshtastic/firmware/issues/4030

At time of writing (2025-09-27, plus or minus a timezone), there does not appear to be any serious attempt to secure application-layer message contents. (At least, not yet)

My hope is that this cool new radio link option will still gain traction and grow and develop without painting itself into a corner, security-wise.

To wit- security hints on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model have improved substantially since my last readthrough.

replies(2): >>45395238 #>>45396559 #
ahdanggit ◴[] No.45395238[source]
I appreciate you pointing that out. I've been curious about meshastatic and wondered how well the encryption was being handled.
replies(1): >>45396835 #
mikeytown2 ◴[] No.45396835[source]
Check out the alternative https://github.com/meshcore-dev/MeshCore Seattle has the largest functioning mesh core installation in the world
replies(2): >>45398134 #>>45398158 #
wtallis ◴[] No.45398158[source]
MeshCore seems to enforce a strict separation between client devices and repeater devices, which is a significant downside for many use cases.
replies(2): >>45402112 #>>45410209 #
1. sschueller ◴[] No.45402112{4}[source]
I find meshcore way more useful as I know if my messages arrive. On meshtastic the conversations especially in groups are always incomplete.