Bob is a software that allows you to transfer a file from one person to another in a secure way. The software requires no installation, no registration and is not a monetised service. The service cannot inspect the content of the documents exchanged. It respects your privacy in many levels. It simply allows the exchange of documents for all, as a fundamental mean of Internet users.
The software is available here : bob.com (x86_64)
You can follow the project via this Atom feed.
Windows support focuses on simplified use of Bob (which can, however, be completed if you are comfortable with the command line). Uploading a file is a drag’n’drop of the file to the downloaded
The user must then share the given password with the person who wants to receive the file. The latter can receive the file by double-clicking on
bob.com and inserting the given password:
For all other platforms but also on Windows1, Bob can be used from a shell and it has several options.
bob.com --help can help you with an exhaustive description of the available options.
The basic use of Bob is to give an existing file/folder or a password as an argument:
ls example.txt $ example.txt bob.com example.txt $ Password: crulgansogglespi-gunkelfaby bob.com crulgansogglespi-gunkelfaby $ Accept from 184.108.40.206:52014 [Y/n]: Y >>> Received a file: example.txt.
More concretely, bob.com offers 3 options:
bob sendto send a file
bob recvto receive a file
bob relayto initiate a relay
To send a file, simply run
bob.com send with the file location. Bob will generate a password which you will need to pass to the person you want to send the file to.
You can decide on several parameters:
--no-compressionoption, this can be efficient for sending videos/images
-roption. You can specify a domain name or an IP address.
For this last option, the argument format can include several pieces of information such as the fingerprint of the TLS certificate used by the DNS resolver. Here are some examples of how to use
# https://blog.uncensoreddns.org/dns-servers/ shows public keys available for # DNS over TLS communication with their servers. We took the ECDSA public key # for unicast.censurfridns.dk cat key.pem $ -----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY----- MHYwEAYHKoZIzj0CAQYFK4EEACIDYgAEkCMVe3bBUpgKecLOPWfe62eivwwQ1t6C pXjH0L8sC3XrrsJYmjIuWuy+g4beaDhQyI5sM/3R2wIDswuWW4qiVUyP/PU767Bw Td8FE0gf+mV90PFHVmGcdabPtAngFADZ -----END PUBLIC KEY----- openssl pkey -inform pem -in ecdsa.pem -pubin -pubout -outform DER | \ $ openssl dgst -sha256 -binary | \ base64 INSZEZpDoWKiavosV2/xVT8O83vk/RRwS+LTiL+IpHs= bob.com send --nameserver \ $ 'tls:220.127.116.11!key-fp:INSZEZpDoWKiavosV2/xVT8O83vk/RRwS+LTiL+IpHs=' example # You can download the certificate with openssl and extract the fingerprint # to use it then openssl s_client -connect 18.104.22.168:853 </dev/null 2>/dev/null | \ $ openssl x509 -fingerprint -sha256 -noout | \ cut -d'=' -f2 | tr -d ':' | xxd -r -p | base64 - ZGDOiBng2T0tx11GsrQDifAV8hVWFcI8kBfqz4mf9U4= bob.com send --nameserver \ $ 'tls:22.214.171.124!cert-fp:sha256:ZGDOiBng2T0tx11GsrQDifAV8hVWFcI8kBfqz4mf9U4=' example
For reception, the
-r options are the same but the software asks directly for the password. Then, it proposes 2 main options:
-ooption to define the destination of your file
-yoption which automatically accepts any file received from a peer with the same password as you just entered.
Indeed, Bob requires, by default, a human action to accept (or not) a file. When making this request, it gives the IP address of the sender as a means of identification.
Other options exist such as
--temp but you can refer to the help offered by
bob.com through the
--help option for more details.
Bob is what is known as a polyglot program. The same program works on several platforms. However, it happens that some platforms misinterpret
bob.com. At this point, there are mainly 2 errors:
zshuser, your shell will probably not recognize
bob.comas an executable.
binfmt_miscuser, it will try to interpret
bob.comas a Wine (or Mono) program
The first problem has been fixed with the recent version of
The second problem requires
binfmt_misc to correctly recognise polyglot programs. An installation is required and available here.
bob.com can become a truly native program to your platform. Indeed, there is an option to turn it into an executable native to your platform:
file bob.com $ bob.com: DOS/MBR boot sector sh -c "./bob.com --assimilate" $ file bob.com $ bob.com: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86_64
This is called assimilation of the program to your platform.
The Bob software also offers the implementation of a relay. We need to describe a little more precisely how bob works and the
-r option available for receiving and sending a document.
Indeed, Bob passes through an intermediary in sending and receiving. We call it the relay. The latter stabilises the connection and avoids a situation of censorship of one of the two protagonists. It also allows the identity of senders and receivers to be arbitrated.
More pragmatically, peer-to-peer file transfer is still difficult to envisage when most Internet service providers refuse to allow their customers to initiate a connection. To overcome this problem, the relay exists and blindly transmits the information of the sender and the receiver. A challenge between all senders and receivers is required to associate peers with the same password.
When this association is made, the communication between the two peers becomes encrypted and only the peers can decrypt the content. The relay, again, only satisfies the transmission by having no means of decrypting the communications.
This requires that users still trust the relay administrator. By default, the relay available at osau.re is used (administered by your humble servant). However, we leave it up to the user to deploy their own relay and use it instead of ours.
The relay can simply be run with:
You can specify few options and one argument:
bob.com relaycan be configured to be bound on a specific IP address
-toption (in seconds).
Other common options exist and we invite you to discover them with
bob.com relay --help. The relay can be switched off properly with the SIGINT signal (^C).
Bob is a MirageOS project and, as such, offers a relay as a unikernel. You can learn more about unikernels on the official MirageOS website or on the robur.coop website (which implements a series of unikernels).
It is therefore possible to deploy a relay as a fully-fledged operating system and virtualise it with KVM or Xen. There are other targets for a MirageOS project such as seccomp or virtio (for Google Cloud) but we will concentrate on deploying a relay on KVM here.
Like any MirageOS project, you need to install the Mirage tool via OPAM.
sudo apt install opam $ opam init -y $ opam switch create 4.14.0 $ opam install mirage $ eval $(opam env)$
Using the mirage tool, it is possible to compile/produce the unikernel in this way:
git clone https://github.com/dinosaure/bob $ cd bob $ opam pin add -y . $ mkdir ../bob-unikernel $ cp unikernel/* ../bob-unikernel/ $ cd ../bob-unikernel/ $ mirage configure -t hvt $ make depends $ mirage build $ ls dist/bob.hvt $ dist/bob.hvt
bob.hvt is crafted and it can be launched with Solo5 and albatross. Albatross is available via
apt if you want:
wget -qO- https://apt.robur.coop/gpg.pub | apt-key add - $ echo "deb https://apt.robur.coop ubuntu-20.04 main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list $ sudo apt update $ sudo apt install solo5-hvt albatross$
The construction of the relay as a unikernel for Solo5 is proposed by your humble servant through our infrastructure which ensures its reproducibility: builds.osau.re/bob-hvt
For OS virtualization, you usually requires a bridge:
cat >>/etc/network/interfaces <<EOF $ auto service iface service inet static address 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 10.0.0.255 bridge_ports none bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 bridge_maxwait 0EOF systemctl restart networking$
Finally, you need to let the unikernel to communicate with Internet and let people to communicate with your unikernel:
cat "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward $ iptables -A FORWARD -o service -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED \ $ -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i service ! -o service -j ACCEPT $ iptables -A FORWARD -i service -o service -j ACCEPT $ iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/24 ! -o service \ $ -j MASQUERADE iptables -N BOB $ iptables -A BOB -d 10.0.0.2/32 ! -i service -o service \ $ -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9000 -j ACCEPT iptables -A BOB -d 10.0.0.2/32 ! -i service -o service \ $ -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9001 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -o service -j BOB $ iptables -t nat -N BOB $ iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -m addrtype --dst-type LOCAL -j BOB $ iptables -t nat -A BOB ! -s 10.0.0.2/32 \ $ -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9000 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0.2:9000 iptables -t nat -A BOB ! -s 10.0.0.2/32 \ $ -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9001 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0.2:9001
This deployment method is typical of deploying a unikernel on a machine that has KVM. Of course, other methods exist and depend on your infrastructure. Deploying on Google Cloud can be quite different but we advise you to refer to our repository which can contain all the necessary information for such infrastructures.
You can finally launch the unikernel with
albatross-client-local create --net=service \ $ --arg="--ipv4=10.0.0.2/24" --arg="--ipv4-gateway=10.0.0.1" bob bob.hvt
Q: I would like to send several files with bob, how can I do that?
A: The best way to send multiple files is to put them all in one folder and send it with
mkdir dir $ cp ../file0 ../file1 ../file2 dir/ $ ./bob.com send dir/$
bob.com takes a long time to compress my file, how can I make it faster?
A: By default,
bob.com compresses files and folders, but in the case of some files (such as videos, images, etc.), compression is inefficient (and slow). However, we don’t want to infer the content of what you want to send (to protect your privacy) - so it’s up to you to recognise whether using
--no-compression is appropriate or not.
./bob.com send --no-compression House.Of.The.Dragons.S01E02.mkv$
Q: It would be very interesting to have a graphical interface to Bob, would it be possible to have one (for Windows for example)?
A: Unfortunately, Bob’s main focus is on portability. In this respect, a graphical interface would pose far more problems than it can solve. We have focused all our efforts on making the software easy to use and we consider it healthy to ask the user to understand how to use Bob.
Q: The relay is inaccessible to me (censorship, intranet, etc.), would it be possible to send a file to someone anyway?
A: If you are subject to censorship, there may be alternatives to the osau.re relay that can be accessed. We therefore invite you to look for such relays (and we endeavour to maintain a list of available relays).
For an intranet, we aim to allow file transfer in such a context but this requires a little more work. An intermediate solution would be to ask your network administrator to deploy a relay.
Q: Is it safe to use my own password to transmit a file?
A: Even though your password will never be transmitted over the network, we do not recommend that you use your password. Indeed, it is more secure to let
bob.com generate a password for you.
The first problem is that an attacker could infer your password through the relay (with a dictionary attack). The second problem is that we humans have fairly predictable password ideas - an attacker could get your file if he/she infers your password faster than the expected receiver.
Q: If I want to deploy a relay, how many resources (bandwidth, power, memory) do I need?
A: The relay is very simple and only transmits the information. Only the “handshake” (when a sender looks for his/her receiver), is expensive but remains finally rather simple (the protocol is not very complicated and the search for agreements is possible only after the transmission of few information).
It all depends on how you want to deploy your relay. Bob is a MirageOS project. You can deploy the relay as an operating system, as a binary with capabilities (seccomp) or as an image for Google Cloud.
More concretely, the Bob unikernel is ~3 MB and only needs 512 MB of memory (probably less) to work properly. The resources required are therefore very minimal. For example, Google Cloud offers such an instance (
f1-micro) for 4$ per month…
Q: Can I contribute to the project and suggest improvements?
A: Yes, the project is a free project (under the MIT license) and you can propose changes to improve Bob on its GitHub repository.
Q: Your project is very cool, can we help in any way the team in charge of its development?
A: As we have said, this project is not a monetised service. We therefore use our own resources (in time and infrastructure) to maintain this project. The best way to help us is to donate on the official website of robur.coop (the association in charge of Bob).
bob.com tells me that it could not save the document because it already exists. What should I do?
bob.com does not want to be intrusive on your system. If the name of the uploaded document already exists on your computer, we will preserve your files and save the uploaded document elsewhere. Bob informs you that he will save the document in a temporary location (for Linux for example, it will save the location in
/tmp). You can also specify the location where you want to save the document with the
Q: File transfer is not as fast as other services. What should I do?
A: A speed problem may exist and concerns all 3 parties involved in the transfer: you, the relay and the receiver. The transfer speed is essentially the one with the lowest transfer speed. To this we add that the resources (especially the relay) are offered to you free of charge. It is therefore appropriate that they do not correspond in their specifics to what competing paid services offer.
bob.com tells me that the file is corrupt. What should I do?
A: There are many reasons why there may be corruption of the document received. Indeed, there may have been an interruption in the file transfer.
bob.com is trying to protect you first and foremost. The received document should be deleted and you should ask the sender to send you the document again.
Q: Why do I need to download
bob.com? Don’t you have an online service available where no download is required?
A: This problem concerns more specifically the notion of security. Creating an online service in which people can transmit their files requires that they trust our relay, our website (offering the service) and our code. In contrast, as far as
bob.com is concerned, you need to trust only our relay and our code - you can even deploy your own relay!
Of course, this implies a barrier in the use of Bob that requires the user to download our software. But we consider this to be a good idea in view of what it can bring us in terms of security.
We are however open to the development of such a service but we need to correctly identify the points concerning security first.
Q: I am a company and would like to use Bob internally. How do I do this and what do I need?
A: Bob can be deployed internally and your users will just need to specify the correct address with the
-r option to communicate with your relay. You have several deployment methods:
bob.com relayin the background on your server. This option is the least difficult to set up. It only requires you to run
bob.comon a server which your users can access.
The second method is however more interesting as the relay will not have the means to directly interact with (and perhaps infect) the host system. A fundamental barrier exists between the unikernel and the host system. As far as osau.re is concerned, we have deployed the relay with Solo5 on KVM.
Q: Can I trust the downloaded binary?
A: Our association has made a definite effort to offer a platform that ensures the “reproducibility” of the software production (between the sources available here and the binary you download). This proof ensures that if you follow the steps to build Bob from a “context” described here, you will get exactly the same thing.
This method allows us to build a relationship of trust between you and us.
Q: If I find a bug, what is the best way to help? A: Bob has some options for giving information that can really help developers. The first is the
-vvv option which displays Bob’s debug information. The second is
--seed (which expects a value in Base64 form) which allows the same state to be reproduced for all generated values. The third is
--reproduce which admits a predictable reproduction of the shared secret key.
These options are not to be used in a real exchange. The predictability of Bob’s operation can be an important attack beam, it is only for debugging.
--reproduce option must be used on both sides (of the sender and receiver). The seed used must also be the same on both sides.
Q: What is the best way to follow the project? A: We offer an Atom feed on our website that keeps you informed of all the progress and changes on our relay. For a more detailed tracking, we advise you to follow our GitHub repository.
After this brief introduction, we can really present
bob.com, its objectives and how it was designed.
The transfer of files remains an elementary action in the exchange of information that the Internet allows. It should not be subject to any limitations, monitoring or restrictions. However, tools and services offering such exchange often require registration, installation, limitation or, worse, your credit card.
Bob’s goal is simple. To allow as many people as possible to exchange files in a quasi-autonomous way. In this respect, the development of
bob.com has 3 objectives:
The primary objective of
bob.com is portability and accessibility on multiple platforms. The world’s computer population does not only run on Windows, Mac or Linux, but there are a whole range of platforms for which there are users (FreeBSD, OpenBSD or NetBSD).
Our primary goal is to provide one and only binary that can be used on all these platforms. Behind this objective, the difficulty can be great. Indeed, this variation of systems is concrete and has heavy implications in the development of a software (whatever it is).
One method to overcome this portability problem is to create a derivation of the software for all these platforms. This means that there is a version of the software for one platform (5 platforms imply 5 versions of the software). Unfortunately, these derivations can lead to hard-to-find bugs as they are often platform-specific (and not necessarily related to the software itself). This derivation also requires quite a lot of work from the developers. It makes us produce the same software on several platforms with their tools (different from each other), their constraints and specificities. We are clearly not experts on all these platforms.
However, the differences between the platforms can be a detail when it comes to making a “simple” software like ours. For this reason, we have opted to use Cosmopolitan. Cosmopolitan offers a foundation which, according to the author, works on all these platforms. The main advantage of Cosmopolitan is that it offers a “polyglot” binary that can run without installation and without prerequisites. The second advantage is that the derivation described above is no longer necessary (at least, it is less required). In this way, the same code works on all these platforms, which makes development easier (and avoids the introduction of new bugs). It is also enough for us to have, at least, only one way to produce our software (only one toolchain) which is a considerable saving in cost (since we do not need several machines/toolchain to offer you our software).
This portability also requires us, perhaps counter-intuitively, to respect strong constraints on what is available on all these platforms. It may be tempting to use the advantage of certain platforms (a nice interface on Windows, a good transmission speed on Linux, etc.) but they are contrary to the desired “universalism” of our software.
Indeed, behind this notion of portability, there is above all the notion of accessibility. We are not all equal in terms of the resources available to us (whether in terms of knowledge or financial resources). We really want to take the opposite approach from the too systematic one which consists in offering good services only to a certain category of the population. It is therefore in our interest to offer the possibility of exchange to everyone (even if this implies concessions on what we ultimately consider to be the margin in view of this first objective of accessibility).
In this sense,
bob.com’s development is very much focused on the notion of portability, which takes precedence over aspects of speed or user experience. This has a real implication on our development where the question persists: is what I am developing portable to all these platforms?
Bob would like to propose an approach where the issue of safety should be systematic. That is to say that all improvements should be thought of through the prism of safety at all levels.
If we were to give an example to understand this way of developing, it would be the addition to
bob.com of its ability to resolve a domain name. It is something very simple that consists of letting
bob.com resolve a domain name like osau.re, know its IP address and then connect to it. This resolution requires an external resource (a DNS resolver) which can be legitimately questioned for its trust.
In this, we propose:
This example shows that for a simple question, several aspects are involved:
In concrete terms,
bob.com ensures that your privacy is not violated by our intermediary, even if only through the protocol used to transmit your documents. Only you know the password used and it is never exchanged by
bob.com in any way. This means that you are responsible for passing on this password to the recipient.
More globally, we consider that security cannot result from an obfuscation of the means put in place for the transfer but from making users aware of the possible risks of corruption and violation of his/her private life. Of course,
bob.com tries to offer a turnkey solution in this transfer (in line with our third point) but the notion of “secrecy” should be yours alone - and in this,
bob.com would not be responsible in any way.
More generally, the notion of security always requires skills, is associated with a particular language, can always be challenged (by means or new techniques). There is no such thing as absolute security and the fundamental principle of trust in this notion should be the question you should ask yourself: do you trust us?
To this question, and according to our vision, we consider that it should be possible for the user to trust us and use our software in the simplest way possible (and thus not require security skills in order to use our software) as well as it should be possible to question our technical choices and to be able to easily modify them in order to gradually implicate your responsibility in this matter of security (which, in all, should only concern you).
In this, we advocate composability and configuration. Indeed, the level of security required and/or expected is fundamentally dependent on a context that is up to you to define. Depending on this context, Bob’s default behaviour may be sufficient for you. However, you may want to: decide on the DNS resolver used, the relay used, the password used, etc. In this, we place a real emphasis on the ability to configure Bob correctly and according to your needs.
However, Bob cannot offer you all the aspects required to feel protected. We cannot integrate all existing solutions as this means either using more external resources that we do not have control over or reimplementing existing solutions. This is where Bob’s composability comes in. Since the software is kept very simple, we maintain different behaviours that make it composable with other solutions like Tor (to achieve, for example, anonymisation).
The definition of simplicity can be very subjective as to Bob’s usage. In this, we will clarify this point. What is meant by simplicity is not necessarily a use whose prerequisite for use is based on a social construction of what software should be. Such a prerequisite is not only determined (uses change) but it is certainly not complete.
It would be usual for software such as Bob to offer a GUI for example in order to “facilitate” the user experience. Not because the GUI is simple but because it is a socially “common” representation for any user. And it is therefore through this common knowledge that the user can apprehend such software “in a simple way”.
We consider that such a view of simplicity is fundamentally wrong since it is not based on the notion of simplicity (in the radical sense of the term) but on a socially common concept that makes this use “seem” simple.
We therefore have a more radical view of simplicity that ultimately offers no credit to what can be done in terms of UI/UX today, tomorrow or yesterday. Our simplicity is based on a usage that may (and should) require new knowledge but which above all ensures a (re)appropriation of the usage by the user.
In other words, to really simplify the use of software, one must understand and learn how to use the software. These termes are not antinomic, even if a notion of learning and understanding is at work, which could be nonsense, and that is our notion of simplicity.
Our objective is not to focus on a particular use of Bob and to dismantle each barrier so that the user can access a single use as simply as possible, but to consider several use cases that Bob can manage through a spontaneity of uses that the user should make his own.
This vision allows us to introduce the user, if he/she wishes, to aspects related to security. Simplicity, once again, is not so much about being able to use the software without any prerequisites (even if we focus on this issue in terms of accessibility) but about the fact that the software can provide keys to understanding the security aspects.
These objectives should certainly not be seen as independent but as interdependent. Security can make the software more complex to use and can make it less accessible as well. Simplicity can put the user’s privacy at risk by omitting details that may be important in file transmission. The sense of simplicity can also limit the accessibility of the software by considering a simplicity by use (building social relics that not everyone has). Finally, accessibility is a real challenge as soon as we integrate cryptographic techniques (are they available on all platforms, etc.) and it implies certain contortions regarding simplicity - what is accessible is not necessarily aligned with simplicity of use.
Bob tries to crystallize all these aspects and we know that on some, and according to everyone’s vision, the software is not perfect. Nevertheless, we want to draw the limits of our framework in order not to catch anyone unaware of the evolution of this software.
So this manifesto is here to lay out (as best we can) what Bob is about and what will happen to it. It is necessary to explain all this because we know that the trust you can place in us does not depend (fortunately) only on the usefulness you can find in this software but also on its stability and the team’s view behind the project.
The Robur Team