4 ms·
I don't use Signal mostly because nobody I know uses it, even though I know they have it installed. By pure usage statistics the winner would be WhatsApp. I als
by zahllos 8y ago
I don't use Signal mostly because nobody I know uses it, even though I know they have it installed. By pure usage statistics the winner would be WhatsApp. I also use Wire.
In terms of issues with each of these, Wire has occasional bugs and hiccups (UX wise) and would be unsuitable for large groups exchanging messages (every device implies an entirely new ratchet, users own multiple devices, and all Wire group chats are client-fan-out, meaning pairwise ratchets with all members. Users with more than one device, even if they communicate one-on-one, are effectively in a group session). However the group message problem implies trade-offs and doesn't have an easy solution, so this shouldn't be seen as game-ending criticism (there's an ongoing effort involving people from all three messengers to figure out group messaging in a safe and scalable way, called Message Layer Security). WhatsApp is much more feature stable, but compromises on client-fan-out to make group messaging simpler. I think Signal also does client fan-out. I think Signal were also a bit dismissive of the low order point issue in their protocol (https://research.kudelskisecurity.com/2017/04/25/should-ecdh-keys-be-validated/ https://research.kudelskisecurity.com/2017/04/25/should-ecdh...), but it's arguable whether this is an issue at all their instantiation of DH (https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/curves/2017/000896.html https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/curves/2017/000896.htm...). So in terms of cryptography, all three are state-of-the-art.
I haven't really used Threema, but for completeness I had a brief look at their crypto "whitepaper". In it they say:
"Due to the inherently asynchronous nature of mobile messengers, providing reliable Forward Secrecy on the end-to-end layer is difficult. Key negotiation for a new chat session would require the other party to be online before the first message can be sent. Experimental schemes like caching pre-generated temporary keys from the clients on the servers increase the server and protocol complexity, ... Due to these and the following considerations, Threema has implemented Forward Secrecy on the transport layer only..."
This means Threema's forward secrecy is based entirely on TLS and doesn't apply to the end-to-end exchange. Also, Signal, Wire and WhatsApp use variants of Signal Protocol and these do pre-keying. It's hardly experimental.
There are other considerations and arguments you can make, such as jurisdiction, use of phone numbers, openness of code, who the parent company is and whether they have a voracious love for hoarding data to rival the NSA, federation etc. I'll leave those. I was responding mostly to the "if you can't break it it's obviously secure" challenge.
tl;dr for a normal person against the average adversary or an only vaguely-interested well-if-we-can-collect-it-why-not NSA, any of Signal, WhatsApp or Wire would be fine.
- yogthos 8y agoI can't believe that anybody would recommend WhatsApp for any kind of secure messaging. The app is closed source, and there's absolutely no way to audit that it implements the protocol faithfully. Facebook can easily be spoofing keys, there's already a story regarding this type of vulnerability https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/13/whatsapp-design-feature-encrypted-messages https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/13/whatsapp-... Say what you will about Telegram, but at least you're getting what's advertised. WhatsApp is a complete black box that's owned by a predatory company whose business is selling user data.