7 ms·

> This is either a reason you love Signal (raises hand) or can't stand Signal. Eh? Why either or? (and why are there people who can't stand it?)

by noja 7y ago

fnordsensei 7y ago
I wouldn't say I can't stand it (indeed, I am using it), but I've had problems with it. Disappearing messages and the like: being contacted via another medium by a person, asking why I hadn't responded, with no record of there ever being a message on my end. It's OK in my books: a symptom of there being no server to step in and enforce a universal truth. You just have to understand what you're getting in exchange for the occasional inconveniences.
myu701 7y ago
I love Signal, and upsell it whenever I can. Signal has its ideosyncratic parts, some of which are being worked on, others not so much. Some of the more visible ones are IMO: Signal forces users to use phone numbers; some people don't like this because they want to use multiple ephemeral usernames so they can be 'Joe' to friends, 'kleptoclown' to their github group, 'dungeonmaster42' to their DND group, 'joesolutioner' to anyone who browses their personal website or business card, etc. that way they are not having to give out the phone number to strangers which represents Sim-jacking and spam risks. If you create a signal group and invite folks to it, you cannot remove members from the group (this is being worked on now) without them clicking the 'leave' button or creating an entire new group sans whoever needs to go, which causes loss of group history. Signal cannot have multiple mobile clients, only one mobile client and a single desktop version. WhatsApp Riot etc. all support clients in as many spots as you can login from. Again -> these are focused nitpicks, but in most cases Signal is much better for upholding the promise of 'you send someone a message and you have a reasonable sense that ONLY THEY will be able to read it' compared to the likes of Line/WhatsApp/FB messenger etc.
- tptacek 7y ago
  It's really an engine for revealing people's true preferences for messaging, which, for many people, tend to be that they want all the ergonomics of Slack a lot more than they want cryptographically sound secure messaging. What's hopeful in all this is that Signal is, slowly, catching up. Slack can roll out new features just by assigning a couple developers to it, and Signal has to coordinate new cryptographic research --- not just new cryptographic research, but research that produces something deployable at scale within the resources of a project like Signal! --- so Slack (and Wire and Keybase) are at a permanent advantage here. But over time, Signal gets more and more usable without having to consider tradeoffs.
  - pgeorgi 7y ago
    > that they want all the ergonomics of Slack a lot more than they want cryptographically sound secure messaging. So you consider accounts not tied to a phone number "Slack ergonomics"? Before WhatsApp that was the default.
    - tptacek 7y ago
      I said it was a reason to hate Signal, not the only reason.
  - juped 7y ago
    Why would Signal (a drop-in SMS replacement) be compared to Slack?
    - tptacek 7y ago
      Because we're talking about group messaging here.
      - juped 7y ago
        Why would group Signal messages (a drop-in replacement for group texts) be compared to Slack?
        rpdillon 7y ago
        I recently was selecting a messaging platform for my family, and we evaluated both Signal and Slack, and went with Slack. My wife did the same with her family, and went with Signal. From this, I gather they overlap in some features enough to compete for some use cases.
        juped 7y ago
        One (Signal) is a replacement for texts, and one isn't. "Overlap in features" wouldn't cover it, but rather how much you want it to be like texting. Thomas Ptacek is a big Signal advocate, as am I, but he doesn't like to think of it as a drop-in replacement for texting, whereas I do (because that's what it is and where it shines). I move texting onto Signal whenever I can.
- squarefoot 7y ago
  "Signal forces users to use phone numbers" Which is number one reason why I'm not even considering it "some people don't like this because they want to use multiple ephemeral usernames" That's not my reason: I don't want people I don't know to get my phone number through other people I know and trust, but are used to share everything online. Of course that would be possible without any social application as well, though using one makes it much more natural. Then this one from their site: "Multiple mobile devices and Android tablets are not currently supported" Triple facepalm here: this makes it even worse than Whatsapp I use (read: am forced to use) on an old tablet. Whatsapp sucks badly just at everything (didn't I write I'm forced to use it?) but at least I can read what I write. Downvotes welcome, though advice on secure+open alternatives that don't assume I have a smartphone (I haven't one and don't plan to) would be more informative.
  - unsignedint 7y ago
    The day I would be comfortable giving out my phone number to stranger is when it becomes mandatory to whitelist all callers, much like how just about any non-PSTN systems work. Maybe this is because of the social expectations of that it will work without such overhead but I just simply can't notice how all the "countermeasures" phone industry (and governments as this is a heavily regulated industry) are ignorance to elephant in the room...
- lorenzhs 7y ago
  > ”Signal cannot have multiple mobile clients, only one mobile client and a single desktop version” This is wrong. You could always have multiple desktop clients. You can also add iPads as linked clients now. Personally, I have two desktops and an iPad linked to Signal. WhatsApp doesn’t support linked devices at all, the web client connects through your phone. Signals linked devices function independently, you can power off your phone and they’ll still work.
- baybal2 7y ago
  If you are a client for Signal, rubberhose cryptoanalysis is a much bigger issue. Here is a story what has happened to Doubi (SSr developer.) He was a very well aware of anonymity risks, and he evaded police for years on end. China literally tried to do geolocate him by turning off the internet in entire cities, but to no result — he caught on to that, and started randomising his release timing, and avoiding releasing "hotfixes". So, the entire Chinese police and MSS been looking him for 4-5 years. What has happened? A few month before his arrest, he registered a Twitter handle with a throwaway SIM card. Those are being usually sold by "grannies" in Chinese 2nd tier cities who peddle things like fake tax receipts, anonymous train tickets and such. China either hacked Twitter, or had somebody bribed there, and they got the number. They then tracked down the granny who sold him the SIM card, and went on and checking every person door to door in that small town. Then, they found him. He got 5 years prison, and 4 years of laogai (gulag)
  - e12e 7y ago
    But, in this story - had he used signal - if the police arrested anyone in contact with him, any one of those would be able to turn over his phone number? Which would be linked to the sim card in his phone? Am I missing something? Or am I misinterpreting your story? You're saying that sign up bound to a Sim card is bad for Twitter and bad (worse) for signal?
    - baybal2 7y ago
      Yes, see, he went as far as buying an anonymous sim in China, which are sold at extreme premium by black market dealers, and still got tracked down.
  - zrth 7y ago
    That's super interesting, thanks for sharing! Would you mind posting a link or a two about the story of Doubi. I can't find much and would love to dig into this story.
    - baybal2 7y ago
      Basically Twitter got pwned big time, and now denies it because GDPR will ruin them if breach is proven. Here is what Doubi's online followers figured: State security got all phone numbers used for Twitter phone verification up to May 2019 and possibly till July. Twitter haphazardly closed the breach in complete secrecy. API hole explanation is excluded as people with 100% private accs got police visits. People with foreign SIM cards also got into trouble. So the explanation that China compromised Twitter's SMS providers is also excluded, as its improbable that they did it in 4+ countries. 2016 breach is also out of question. The only explanation is that they got hold on a big piece of their user DB, or, worse, they have an active infiltrator in Twitter, or Twitter voluntarily cooperated. https://mobile.twitter.com/robert_spalding/status/1134797195771863041 https://mobile.twitter.com/robert_spalding/status/1134797195... https://amp.ft.com/content/afd44222-5c34-11e9-9dde-7aedca0a081a https://amp.ft.com/content/afd44222-5c34-11e9-9dde-7aedca0a0...
- Kihashi 7y ago
  > Signal cannot have multiple mobile clients, only one mobile client and a single desktop version You are right about the mobile client, but that's not true of desktop. I have Signal installed and setup on every desktop/laptop that I use without any issue.
yarrel 7y ago
It's a great piece of software, so people love it. But the sometimes uncritical love people have for it doesn't help when it has issues. The main categories of people I've encountered who aren't absolute Signal fans are: * People who don't want to give out their phone number to random men. * People who weren't impressed by Signal's security issues coming up at the same time that it was being pushed as the replacement for GPG.

> This is either a reason you love Signal (raises hand) or can't stand Signal. Eh? Why either or? (and why are there people who can't stand it?)

by noja 7y ago

> This is either a reason you love Signal (raises hand) or can't stand Signal. Eh? Why either or? (and why are there people who can't stand it?)

fnordsensei 7y ago

I wouldn't say I can't stand it (indeed, I am using it), but I've had problems with it. Disappearing messages and the like: being contacted via another medium by a person, asking why I hadn't responded, with no record of there ever being a message on my end. It's OK in my books: a symptom of there being no server to step in and enforce a universal truth. You just have to understand what you're getting in exchange for the occasional inconveniences.

myu701 7y ago

I love Signal, and upsell it whenever I can. Signal has its ideosyncratic parts, some of which are being worked on, others not so much. Some of the more visible ones are IMO: Signal forces users to use phone numbers; some people don't like this because they want to use multiple ephemeral usernames so they can be 'Joe' to friends, 'kleptoclown' to their github group, 'dungeonmaster42' to their DND group, 'joesolutioner' to anyone who browses their personal website or business card, etc. that way they are not having to give out the phone number to strangers which represents Sim-jacking and spam risks. If you create a signal group and invite folks to it, you cannot remove members from the group (this is being worked on now) without them clicking the 'leave' button or creating an entire new group sans whoever needs to go, which causes loss of group history. Signal cannot have multiple mobile clients, only one mobile client and a single desktop version. WhatsApp Riot etc. all support clients in as many spots as you can login from. Again -> these are focused nitpicks, but in most cases Signal is much better for upholding the promise of 'you send someone a message and you have a reasonable sense that ONLY THEY will be able to read it' compared to the likes of Line/WhatsApp/FB messenger etc.

tptacek 7y ago
It's really an engine for revealing people's true preferences for messaging, which, for many people, tend to be that they want all the ergonomics of Slack a lot more than they want cryptographically sound secure messaging. What's hopeful in all this is that Signal is, slowly, catching up. Slack can roll out new features just by assigning a couple developers to it, and Signal has to coordinate new cryptographic research --- not just new cryptographic research, but research that produces something deployable at scale within the resources of a project like Signal! --- so Slack (and Wire and Keybase) are at a permanent advantage here. But over time, Signal gets more and more usable without having to consider tradeoffs.
- pgeorgi 7y ago
  > that they want all the ergonomics of Slack a lot more than they want cryptographically sound secure messaging. So you consider accounts not tied to a phone number "Slack ergonomics"? Before WhatsApp that was the default.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    I said it was a reason to hate Signal, not the only reason.
- juped 7y ago
  Why would Signal (a drop-in SMS replacement) be compared to Slack?
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Because we're talking about group messaging here.
    - juped 7y ago
      Why would group Signal messages (a drop-in replacement for group texts) be compared to Slack?
      - rpdillon 7y ago
        I recently was selecting a messaging platform for my family, and we evaluated both Signal and Slack, and went with Slack. My wife did the same with her family, and went with Signal. From this, I gather they overlap in some features enough to compete for some use cases.
        juped 7y ago
        One (Signal) is a replacement for texts, and one isn't. "Overlap in features" wouldn't cover it, but rather how much you want it to be like texting. Thomas Ptacek is a big Signal advocate, as am I, but he doesn't like to think of it as a drop-in replacement for texting, whereas I do (because that's what it is and where it shines). I move texting onto Signal whenever I can.
squarefoot 7y ago
"Signal forces users to use phone numbers" Which is number one reason why I'm not even considering it "some people don't like this because they want to use multiple ephemeral usernames" That's not my reason: I don't want people I don't know to get my phone number through other people I know and trust, but are used to share everything online. Of course that would be possible without any social application as well, though using one makes it much more natural. Then this one from their site: "Multiple mobile devices and Android tablets are not currently supported" Triple facepalm here: this makes it even worse than Whatsapp I use (read: am forced to use) on an old tablet. Whatsapp sucks badly just at everything (didn't I write I'm forced to use it?) but at least I can read what I write. Downvotes welcome, though advice on secure+open alternatives that don't assume I have a smartphone (I haven't one and don't plan to) would be more informative.
- unsignedint 7y ago
  The day I would be comfortable giving out my phone number to stranger is when it becomes mandatory to whitelist all callers, much like how just about any non-PSTN systems work. Maybe this is because of the social expectations of that it will work without such overhead but I just simply can't notice how all the "countermeasures" phone industry (and governments as this is a heavily regulated industry) are ignorance to elephant in the room...
lorenzhs 7y ago
> ”Signal cannot have multiple mobile clients, only one mobile client and a single desktop version” This is wrong. You could always have multiple desktop clients. You can also add iPads as linked clients now. Personally, I have two desktops and an iPad linked to Signal. WhatsApp doesn’t support linked devices at all, the web client connects through your phone. Signals linked devices function independently, you can power off your phone and they’ll still work.
baybal2 7y ago
If you are a client for Signal, rubberhose cryptoanalysis is a much bigger issue. Here is a story what has happened to Doubi (SSr developer.) He was a very well aware of anonymity risks, and he evaded police for years on end. China literally tried to do geolocate him by turning off the internet in entire cities, but to no result — he caught on to that, and started randomising his release timing, and avoiding releasing "hotfixes". So, the entire Chinese police and MSS been looking him for 4-5 years. What has happened? A few month before his arrest, he registered a Twitter handle with a throwaway SIM card. Those are being usually sold by "grannies" in Chinese 2nd tier cities who peddle things like fake tax receipts, anonymous train tickets and such. China either hacked Twitter, or had somebody bribed there, and they got the number. They then tracked down the granny who sold him the SIM card, and went on and checking every person door to door in that small town. Then, they found him. He got 5 years prison, and 4 years of laogai (gulag)
- e12e 7y ago
  But, in this story - had he used signal - if the police arrested anyone in contact with him, any one of those would be able to turn over his phone number? Which would be linked to the sim card in his phone? Am I missing something? Or am I misinterpreting your story? You're saying that sign up bound to a Sim card is bad for Twitter and bad (worse) for signal?
  - baybal2 7y ago
    Yes, see, he went as far as buying an anonymous sim in China, which are sold at extreme premium by black market dealers, and still got tracked down.
- zrth 7y ago
  That's super interesting, thanks for sharing! Would you mind posting a link or a two about the story of Doubi. I can't find much and would love to dig into this story.
  - baybal2 7y ago
    Basically Twitter got pwned big time, and now denies it because GDPR will ruin them if breach is proven. Here is what Doubi's online followers figured: State security got all phone numbers used for Twitter phone verification up to May 2019 and possibly till July. Twitter haphazardly closed the breach in complete secrecy. API hole explanation is excluded as people with 100% private accs got police visits. People with foreign SIM cards also got into trouble. So the explanation that China compromised Twitter's SMS providers is also excluded, as its improbable that they did it in 4+ countries. 2016 breach is also out of question. The only explanation is that they got hold on a big piece of their user DB, or, worse, they have an active infiltrator in Twitter, or Twitter voluntarily cooperated. https://mobile.twitter.com/robert_spalding/status/1134797195771863041 https://mobile.twitter.com/robert_spalding/status/1134797195... https://amp.ft.com/content/afd44222-5c34-11e9-9dde-7aedca0a081a https://amp.ft.com/content/afd44222-5c34-11e9-9dde-7aedca0a0...
Kihashi 7y ago
> Signal cannot have multiple mobile clients, only one mobile client and a single desktop version You are right about the mobile client, but that's not true of desktop. I have Signal installed and setup on every desktop/laptop that I use without any issue.

yarrel 7y ago

It's a great piece of software, so people love it. But the sometimes uncritical love people have for it doesn't help when it has issues. The main categories of people I've encountered who aren't absolute Signal fans are: * People who don't want to give out their phone number to random men. * People who weren't impressed by Signal's security issues coming up at the same time that it was being pushed as the replacement for GPG.