9 ms·

Honestly, this makes me appreciate Signal all the more – it seems the only barrier is getting friends to adopt it, but if used by an organization could it be an

Honestly, this makes me appreciate Signal all the more – it seems the only barrier is getting friends to adopt it, but if used by an organization could it be an alternative to E2EE email?

tptacek 7y ago
Yes.
NikolaeVarius 7y ago
In my experience, the client is stupidly buggy. I've lost messages silently multiple times. This is a known issue and after losing several key messages stopped using it. So, IMO the barrier is, "actually working" https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/5253 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/5253 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/search?q=missing+messages&type=Issues https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/search?q=missing...
- asdf-asdf-asdf 7y ago
  it probably should be mentioned that the first github issue you linked is about signal loosing SMS-messages, not signal-messages. so for the case mentioned by the parent (" getting friends to adopt it") it is not really relevant.
  - Vinnl 7y ago
    One thing I've been able to tell friends is to just replace their default SMS app with Signal, since they're not particularly attached to that app anyway. Then, at least their messages to me will then be encrypted, and every additional person I get to install Signal will have an additional contact being able to use it/join a group.
    - strbean 7y ago
      I did that, but it was disappointing losing my message history for SMS messages when my phone boot-looped and I had to re-flash.
      - brokenmachine 7y ago
        It would have been the same outcome regardless of what SMS app you were using.
    - QuinnWilton 7y ago
      This works until they either switch back to their original app or get a new phone and don't install signal on it. If you stop using Signal you need to deregister your phone number from the service, but many people don't know or care to do that. If they don't, anyone who has ever used Signal to communicate with them will be silently unable to contact them anymore.
      - Vinnl 7y ago
        True. The former hasn't been a problem for me, the latter's becoming increasingly less so now that more and more people have switched, and people are starting to more consciously use it every now and then for one of the few Signal groups we have - but it certainly was a problem at first.
- dnh44 7y ago
  I use it both on iOS and macOS and it’s become substantially better in the last year or so, especially in terms of the two clients syncing with each other.
vpEfljFL 7y ago
Could you please explain to me why Signal is the superior messaging platform? I can't understand why it requires ID/passport from you to use it. I guess if you want to use an encrypted messaging platform then you don't want it to be tied to the government issued ID. p.s. you phone number is tied you your ID, so it's basically your ID
- some_random 7y ago
  In comparison to what other messaging platforms? What do you mean it requires ID/passport? It uses phone number as a "username", which is why it's easy to use.
  - DenseComet 7y ago
    Some countries require ID/passport to just get a phone number. This could potentially be sidestepped by getting a Twilio number or Google Voice number, but that causes it to be far from frictionless.
    - NikolaeVarius 7y ago
      This is like complaining that you need to sign up for the internet using personal info to get onto the net.
      - vpEfljFL 7y ago
        Unless if ISP positions itself as rigid security service devoted to provide you security features and some famous people recommend using it in order to transfer sensitive documents.
        llukas 7y ago
        They do not promise anonymous transfers. They promise encrypted transfers.
      - zokier 7y ago
blablabla123 7y ago
That's just my opinion, but to me E2EE from Whatsapp/Signal/Telegram is just Marketing. The trust is worse than Trust on first use (TOFU) since it can change repeatedly, most people install it through the Play Store so one might argue that it is in a certain sense as secure as closed-source software and the whole key exchange is hidden from the user. Not to mention that most Smartphones are blackboxes to a large part and phone number based apps are vulnerable to sim hijacking (yes we see when the key changes, but nobody cares and it's difficult to reestablish the trust). Probably depends on the use-case, but as a normal user that lives in a non-repressive state, there is little value in using Signal. (FWIW Signal uses central servers, so in a repressive state it can just be turned off?) GPG based security is superior and not tied to a blackbox platform...
- tialaramex 7y ago
  Let's address these one by one: "[A correspondent's security code which is the only way to be sure you aren't MITM'd] can change repeatedly": It will tell you this happened, allowing you to take whatever action you think is appropriate. Also like modern TLS the behaviour is that you are always protected by the protocol from passive eavesdroppers regardless. Pervasive Monitoring Is An Attack and so protection against this is far more than "just Marketing". "Most people install it through the Play Store": Play Store APKs are signed by their creator, not (only) by Google. If Open Whisper Systems says you're getting Signal, Google don't get to substitute something else except if you buy a Google phone and only then by replacing your OS. "Phone number based apps are vulnerable to SIM hijacking". Signal users can choose to "lock" their account with a PIN so that an apparently new phone with that number doesn't get access unless its owner presents the PIN. Assuming that you think the phrase "non-repressive state" includes countries like the US that spend billions of dollars to spy on their own citizens, just the first item is already a huge benefit. Harvesting every single SMS message is trivial and so undoubtedly the NSA does it, they can run simple keyword matching an statistical analysis, and keep everything in case it's interesting. Each SMS message carries the sender, recipient and full text. In contrast harvesting even the encrypted Signal messages is difficult, and even with a successful (and relatively unlikely) breach of Open Whisper Systems itself neither the contents or in most cases senders are revealed by doing this. (Messages to friends or to those happy to receive messages from strangers don't need to reveal who sent them to Signal's own systems, only to the recipient). So instantly such government bulk collection isn't possible. GPG's security is definitely not "superior" because it's based on the PGP hybrid crypto which is from last century. For example there's no Forward Secrecy, so it makes sense to steal encrypted PGP data on the expectation that you'll some day be able to decrypt it. In contrast old Signal encrypted messages are probably completely useless because the keys needed to decrypt them likely no longer exist anywhere. PGP offers only a signature mechanism, so a recipient can prove you sent a message, whereas in Signal the recipient only has their own certainty that it's not a forgery - nobody else could have forged it, but they easily could and so they can't use that as proof of anything.

Honestly, this makes me appreciate Signal all the more – it seems the only barrier is getting friends to adopt it, but if used by an organization could it be an alternative to E2EE email?

tptacek 7y ago

Yes.

NikolaeVarius 7y ago

In my experience, the client is stupidly buggy. I've lost messages silently multiple times. This is a known issue and after losing several key messages stopped using it. So, IMO the barrier is, "actually working" https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/5253 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/5253 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/search?q=missing+messages&type=Issues https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/search?q=missing...

asdf-asdf-asdf 7y ago
it probably should be mentioned that the first github issue you linked is about signal loosing SMS-messages, not signal-messages. so for the case mentioned by the parent (" getting friends to adopt it") it is not really relevant.
- Vinnl 7y ago
  One thing I've been able to tell friends is to just replace their default SMS app with Signal, since they're not particularly attached to that app anyway. Then, at least their messages to me will then be encrypted, and every additional person I get to install Signal will have an additional contact being able to use it/join a group.
  - strbean 7y ago
    I did that, but it was disappointing losing my message history for SMS messages when my phone boot-looped and I had to re-flash.
    - brokenmachine 7y ago
      It would have been the same outcome regardless of what SMS app you were using.
  - QuinnWilton 7y ago
    This works until they either switch back to their original app or get a new phone and don't install signal on it. If you stop using Signal you need to deregister your phone number from the service, but many people don't know or care to do that. If they don't, anyone who has ever used Signal to communicate with them will be silently unable to contact them anymore.
    - Vinnl 7y ago
      True. The former hasn't been a problem for me, the latter's becoming increasingly less so now that more and more people have switched, and people are starting to more consciously use it every now and then for one of the few Signal groups we have - but it certainly was a problem at first.
dnh44 7y ago
I use it both on iOS and macOS and it’s become substantially better in the last year or so, especially in terms of the two clients syncing with each other.

vpEfljFL 7y ago

Could you please explain to me why Signal is the superior messaging platform? I can't understand why it requires ID/passport from you to use it. I guess if you want to use an encrypted messaging platform then you don't want it to be tied to the government issued ID. p.s. you phone number is tied you your ID, so it's basically your ID

some_random 7y ago
In comparison to what other messaging platforms? What do you mean it requires ID/passport? It uses phone number as a "username", which is why it's easy to use.
- DenseComet 7y ago
  Some countries require ID/passport to just get a phone number. This could potentially be sidestepped by getting a Twilio number or Google Voice number, but that causes it to be far from frictionless.
  - NikolaeVarius 7y ago
    This is like complaining that you need to sign up for the internet using personal info to get onto the net.
    - vpEfljFL 7y ago
      Unless if ISP positions itself as rigid security service devoted to provide you security features and some famous people recommend using it in order to transfer sensitive documents.
      - llukas 7y ago
        They do not promise anonymous transfers. They promise encrypted transfers.
    - zokier 7y ago

blablabla123 7y ago

That's just my opinion, but to me E2EE from Whatsapp/Signal/Telegram is just Marketing. The trust is worse than Trust on first use (TOFU) since it can change repeatedly, most people install it through the Play Store so one might argue that it is in a certain sense as secure as closed-source software and the whole key exchange is hidden from the user. Not to mention that most Smartphones are blackboxes to a large part and phone number based apps are vulnerable to sim hijacking (yes we see when the key changes, but nobody cares and it's difficult to reestablish the trust). Probably depends on the use-case, but as a normal user that lives in a non-repressive state, there is little value in using Signal. (FWIW Signal uses central servers, so in a repressive state it can just be turned off?) GPG based security is superior and not tied to a blackbox platform...

tialaramex 7y ago
Let's address these one by one: "[A correspondent's security code which is the only way to be sure you aren't MITM'd] can change repeatedly": It will tell you this happened, allowing you to take whatever action you think is appropriate. Also like modern TLS the behaviour is that you are always protected by the protocol from passive eavesdroppers regardless. Pervasive Monitoring Is An Attack and so protection against this is far more than "just Marketing". "Most people install it through the Play Store": Play Store APKs are signed by their creator, not (only) by Google. If Open Whisper Systems says you're getting Signal, Google don't get to substitute something else except if you buy a Google phone and only then by replacing your OS. "Phone number based apps are vulnerable to SIM hijacking". Signal users can choose to "lock" their account with a PIN so that an apparently new phone with that number doesn't get access unless its owner presents the PIN. Assuming that you think the phrase "non-repressive state" includes countries like the US that spend billions of dollars to spy on their own citizens, just the first item is already a huge benefit. Harvesting every single SMS message is trivial and so undoubtedly the NSA does it, they can run simple keyword matching an statistical analysis, and keep everything in case it's interesting. Each SMS message carries the sender, recipient and full text. In contrast harvesting even the encrypted Signal messages is difficult, and even with a successful (and relatively unlikely) breach of Open Whisper Systems itself neither the contents or in most cases senders are revealed by doing this. (Messages to friends or to those happy to receive messages from strangers don't need to reveal who sent them to Signal's own systems, only to the recipient). So instantly such government bulk collection isn't possible. GPG's security is definitely not "superior" because it's based on the PGP hybrid crypto which is from last century. For example there's no Forward Secrecy, so it makes sense to steal encrypted PGP data on the expectation that you'll some day be able to decrypt it. In contrast old Signal encrypted messages are probably completely useless because the keys needed to decrypt them likely no longer exist anywhere. PGP offers only a signature mechanism, so a recipient can prove you sent a message, whereas in Signal the recipient only has their own certainty that it's not a forgery - nobody else could have forged it, but they easily could and so they can't use that as proof of anything.