Sync uses aes256 encryption, which is great, because it's very, very, very hard to break. The problem of aes256 is that there is only one key; if ten people have the key and suddenly a lot more, somebody is leaky and you're probably not going to find out who. In this case, files are no longer protected and might be publicly available. Also the secret key has to be shared outside of Sync, now you have to be very carefull, because you'll need a safe way to send the key to trusted clients while a lot of people probably think using email is safe enough; it's not. I think it would be nice if an option would be added to be able to manage a "secret". With public key cryptography this can be achieved in some way. Every client should generate its own set of asymmetric keys (one made available to the secrets you join / try to join and the other will be kept completely private, only available to the client itself), now a secure connection can be initiated without sharing the the secret key unencrypted or outside Sync (like email or im). Now the master-client (the client where the the "secret" was created) decides who it will allow or refuse (or even invite). Now you could also create groups inside a shared secret, the master-client decides who is in what group and sets the rights for each group. When implemented right, you could create multiple groups wherein the clients can't determine they are in a specific group and also they don't know they might be the only one having access to a file while sharing data to all clients in the shared secret. As long as the master-client is not online, no changes can be made in groups but new files can still be added and everything will stay available. Of course, in a managed shared secret, people can still share files to others by just sending a copy, but they can't give others direct access to the managed shared secret so the master-client keeps control. Also the group thing makes the master-client able to send wrong or different information to specific groups or clients; when such information leaks (the client doesn't know it is the only one, besides the master-client, who has this data), the person in posession of the master-client can determine who is leaky and might decide to kick a specific client. So, that's my wish. I know it is pretty complex; if you don't understand, feel free to ask anything about this, I'll tro to explain.
