4 ms·

Signal started open-source, it was TextSecure, I'm sure there'll be an open-source alternative if the commercial entity fails, though I hope they do not.

billme 6y ago
As far as I know, while the DevOps code is not open source, the server and app code are on GitHub; that is you’re able to roll your own version however it defined by the licensing; recent attack on Signal by security researcher used a self-compiled app as a proof of concept; Signal patched the issue.
- jlund 6y ago
  Just to clarify, the bug you're talking about was in WebRTC. We submitted a patch upstream: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/175960 https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/175960
  - billme 6y ago
    Right, here’s another comment on the topic by Signal staff too: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pthatcherg https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pthatcherg
- solinent 6y ago
  I didn't mean to imply Signal wasn't open-source, just that it was based on TextSecure and can be forked. If the commercial entity fails or is held liable, we just need a distributed profile system, should be easy enough.
loeg 6y ago
Signal is still open source and is not a commercial entity.
- solinent 6y ago
  > Signal Messenger, LLC, is a software organization that was founded by Moxie Marlinspike and Brian Acton in 2018 Did you google it? You're simply wrong. It is open-source as it was, I didn't dispute that, but they are liable for their users if this bill passes, and they will easily go bankrupt. If there's no commercial entity, then liability falls to the developers most likely--whose identity can be obscured since they're developing Signal hopefully. https://www.corporationwiki.com/p/31jiai/signal-messenger-llc https://www.corporationwiki.com/p/31jiai/signal-messenger-ll... They have a standard corporate structure--based in Delaware, registered as a Foreign entity in California.
  - loeg 6y ago
    No; I didn't have to Google it because I've been paying attention to Signal for the better part of the last decade. I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. If you've googled it, surely you're aware of the Signal Foundation[1], the 501(c)(3) parent organization of the LLC. And while OWS/Signal Messenger did not have formal non-profit status prior to the Signal Foundation, it was never acting as a for-profit entity[2]: > in general, Open Whisper Systems is a project rather than a company, and the project's objective is not financial profit. [1]: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824506840 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7701666 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7701666 (2014)
    - solinent 6y ago
      I've been paying attention as well, I've been using it since the early days, I also have an M&A lawyer by my side. The Signal Foundation is responsible for all costs associated with the project--without it the project wouldn't function. OWS was also largely a corporation, but it wasn't require for TextSecure to operate--a key difference. > And while OWS/Signal Messenger did not have formal non-profit status prior to the Signal Foundation, it was never acting as a for-profit entity[2]: A corporation, non-profit or not, is still a corporation. Based on my knowledge of full-cycle accounting for non-profits, they tend to make more profit, they just pay less taxes. Having a non-commercial parent doesn't mean your business is non-commercial, Signal Messenger LLC is the corp which is associated with Signal Messenger. Signal Messenger could offer private equity, since Signal Foundation is not the exclusive shareholder. I have an M&A lawyer right here if you want me to ask him. In any case, I doubt they have enough funding to do this in a standard donation-based non-profit, it seems like there's a non-profit which is used to funnel money to the commercial entity, Signal Messenger LLC. It's a standard structure, I'm sure, but it's definitely not your standard non-profit. I'm more concerned about the coloquial use of commerical in any case--does the corp make profits or not, not whether they pay tax or not. I'd say they're looking to transition into a fully non-commercial entity, but for the purposes of this thread they are still a corporation and can still be held liable for their users' actions--in this case the app can still operate without a formal legal entity, but it would be removed from app stores, I'm sure.

billme 6y ago

As far as I know, while the DevOps code is not open source, the server and app code are on GitHub; that is you’re able to roll your own version however it defined by the licensing; recent attack on Signal by security researcher used a self-compiled app as a proof of concept; Signal patched the issue.

jlund 6y ago
Just to clarify, the bug you're talking about was in WebRTC. We submitted a patch upstream: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/175960 https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/175960
- billme 6y ago
  Right, here’s another comment on the topic by Signal staff too: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pthatcherg https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pthatcherg
solinent 6y ago
I didn't mean to imply Signal wasn't open-source, just that it was based on TextSecure and can be forked. If the commercial entity fails or is held liable, we just need a distributed profile system, should be easy enough.

loeg 6y ago

Signal is still open source and is not a commercial entity.

solinent 6y ago
> Signal Messenger, LLC, is a software organization that was founded by Moxie Marlinspike and Brian Acton in 2018 Did you google it? You're simply wrong. It is open-source as it was, I didn't dispute that, but they are liable for their users if this bill passes, and they will easily go bankrupt. If there's no commercial entity, then liability falls to the developers most likely--whose identity can be obscured since they're developing Signal hopefully. https://www.corporationwiki.com/p/31jiai/signal-messenger-llc https://www.corporationwiki.com/p/31jiai/signal-messenger-ll... They have a standard corporate structure--based in Delaware, registered as a Foreign entity in California.
- loeg 6y ago
  No; I didn't have to Google it because I've been paying attention to Signal for the better part of the last decade. I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. If you've googled it, surely you're aware of the Signal Foundation[1], the 501(c)(3) parent organization of the LLC. And while OWS/Signal Messenger did not have formal non-profit status prior to the Signal Foundation, it was never acting as a for-profit entity[2]: > in general, Open Whisper Systems is a project rather than a company, and the project's objective is not financial profit. [1]: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824506840 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7701666 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7701666 (2014)
  - solinent 6y ago
    I've been paying attention as well, I've been using it since the early days, I also have an M&A lawyer by my side. The Signal Foundation is responsible for all costs associated with the project--without it the project wouldn't function. OWS was also largely a corporation, but it wasn't require for TextSecure to operate--a key difference. > And while OWS/Signal Messenger did not have formal non-profit status prior to the Signal Foundation, it was never acting as a for-profit entity[2]: A corporation, non-profit or not, is still a corporation. Based on my knowledge of full-cycle accounting for non-profits, they tend to make more profit, they just pay less taxes. Having a non-commercial parent doesn't mean your business is non-commercial, Signal Messenger LLC is the corp which is associated with Signal Messenger. Signal Messenger could offer private equity, since Signal Foundation is not the exclusive shareholder. I have an M&A lawyer right here if you want me to ask him. In any case, I doubt they have enough funding to do this in a standard donation-based non-profit, it seems like there's a non-profit which is used to funnel money to the commercial entity, Signal Messenger LLC. It's a standard structure, I'm sure, but it's definitely not your standard non-profit. I'm more concerned about the coloquial use of commerical in any case--does the corp make profits or not, not whether they pay tax or not. I'd say they're looking to transition into a fully non-commercial entity, but for the purposes of this thread they are still a corporation and can still be held liable for their users' actions--in this case the app can still operate without a formal legal entity, but it would be removed from app stores, I'm sure.