Communication as a Public Good

Many current messaging solutions are developed by well-known large companies or organizations, and the software is usually treated as a corporate secret. Closed-source software poses a particular risk, especially regarding security-relevant functions (including encryption, key management, privacy-relevant functions, etc.).

The user must trust that the provider has implemented everything correctly in their software and has not included backdoors for themselves or others. They must also trust that no unauthorized information is being captured and that the cryptographic keys are stored securely and not transferred or misused. Without access to the software's source code, it is very difficult for independent testers to check whether such problems exist.

Open Source - Open Standards

Trustless software, i.e., software whose function does not rely on anyone's promises, is only possible if the source codes from which the software is built or which form the core of the used libraries are fully and openly accessible. Otherwise, censorship, privacy violations, and even insecure encryption cannot be ruled out without trusting the provider. Offering a secure messenger is not enough to promise secure software standards and, in the best case, even use them. The software must be verifiable and, above all, independent of a trusted provider.

The availability and maintainability of the code also play an important role. Software based on proprietary code developed and kept secret by a company or organization can be discontinued and removed from the market at any time if the company wishes to do so, no longer exists, or is forced to do so, regardless of whether the user community wishes to continue using the software or not. On the other hand, open-source software exists independently of such organizations and can be further developed, maintained, and used by the community.

The situation is very similar to the standards and, in some cases, even more critical. Standards should not be defined by a powerful party that then enforces the quasi-standard with its market power (as has unfortunately very often been the case in the past). Nor should a standard be misused to allow a powerful party to consolidate its supremacy by imposing its interests by controlling the definition of the quasi-standard and dominating or even bullying smaller market participants (for example, through frequent breaking changes or hidden features that make it difficult for others to keep up to date).

Open standards and associated frameworks and libraries are most available to a community when they are available as a public good and open-source. Then, everyone is free to contribute and test, the community can actively participate in the review and further development, and no party controls the code to the detriment of other market participants. No powerful organization can restrict or completely prevent the use if the community does not want it.

Inclusivity and Accessibility

DM3 is designed as a public good based on open-source software with a license that minimally restricts use. It is a community-driven protocol, library, and application. The public good approach is essential to enable the protocol to be used in both large and small applications. All participants have the same rights, so neither large nor small solutions are disadvantaged or have to fear that they will suffer a disadvantage when using DM3.

Through the community's collective efforts, the protocol can evolve to achieve the goal of a connected messaging ecosystem. Specifications and source codes are freely available, and the community can contribute important parts. The free availability as open-source also enables companies and organizations behind established solutions to participate.