We build free, open-source privacy tools — encrypted chat, anonymous mail, untraceable voice, a whistleblower drop, a browser, a network layer. All given away.

But "free and open source" means nothing if you can't check it. So:

  • Source is public — read every line: github.com/Anon-Gratis
  • Hashes are signed — verify the binary matches what we published
  • Build it yourself — don't want our binary? Compile it from source

We don't want your trust. We want you to not need it. The only privacy tool that survives "trust me bro" is the one you can read.

🌐 anonymous.gratis · ✉️ admin@anon.gratis (PGP on site)

all 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Exposure.

    What do you prefer? Or… are you not a developer and you just want to complain?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (4 children)

    Exposure

    Then where’s their radicle instance?

    are you not a developer and you just want to complain?

    protip: for someone to subscribe themselves to this /c/, you HAVE TO pressume subscribers have modicum scripting and setup knowledge. Otherwise you read antisocial for not scoping who would 1) know what lemmy is, 2) subscribe to/c/privacy/, 3) respond in dissatisfaction to centralizing mirrors in fascist servers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    ASPD.

    So, what’s your preferred solution?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Ok, now you demonstrating poor reading comprehension. Reread my first answer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Why would I use their wireguard android app instead of the official one?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 18 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 56 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Hacktivists on GitHub. Show me your forgejo

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    All these JVM-based packages just appeared out of nowhere three weeks ago and have no almost no git commit history. Your fediverse accounts are weeks to hours old. 🤔

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    Good point. The first repo, anon-vpn, has single commit made 3 weeks ago.

    Security sensitive software require time, review or audit. Let's give this time. It may take from a few months to 2 years until there's enough scrutiny to either confirm it's safe, or reveal problems.

    Until them, keep using well-known open-source software.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Love the message, but personally I won’t use software written by LLMs.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 15 points 5 months ago

    Um... vas? Maybe I don't get it, but you're just forking and tweaking already open source software? How does this change the model of anything?

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    So many people conflate privacy with anonymity.
    They're largely unrelated.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

    I think this would be a relatively straightforward explanation. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    Privacy - whether your door's keys are given to someone.

    Anonymity - whether or not someone can see what's behind your door.

    Security - whether or not your door is locked and has alarms.


    Good & Bad practice examples

    Good privacy: people can only enter and leave your door with your consent.

    Good anonymity: people don't know what's behind your door.

    Good security: people can't break in easily, and if they do, you know.


    Bad privacy: adversaries can enter and leave your door without your consent.

    Bad anonymity: adversaries know what's behind your door.

    Bad security: adversaries can break in easily, and if they do, you don't know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    Privacy is about activity.
    Anonymity is about identity.
    Security is about ensuring the other two.

    I would say: Privacy is everyone seeing you come and go from a house with no windows.
    Anonymity is when you're covered head to toe when you come and go. So nobody know who lives there.
    Security is a measure of how good your locks and coveralls are.

    Real world examples: Going to a protest with a mask is anonymous, in public.
    Sessions with your court appointed therapist are private, not anonymous.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Privacy - only those you allow can see what happens behind the door

    Security - only those you allow can open the door

    Anonymity - only those you allow know who the door belongs to

    Secrecy - only those you allow know the door exists.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago

    We already have all this stuff, stop larping as a 1337 h4x0r and go fix some bugs in your preferred xmpp client or one of those Firefox forks

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    So, is this like what proton shoulda been? Not exactly ik, but is this like a suite?

  • source