6 ms·

What's the alternative to Signal then? For iOS users?

sneak 6y ago
There is no alternative that provides the ease of use and privacy guarantees. I think the OWS/Moxie hate is misplaced. They’re competing with iMessage and WhatsApp and Instagram and Facebook, and Signal is a much better option than all of those. Let’s be honest: the alternative is that Facebook gets all of our chats in cleartext.
- ColanR 6y ago
  I think Drew responded to that. I thought this was a key quote: > Off the bat, let me explain that I expect a tool which claims to be secure to actually be secure. I don’t view “but that makes it harder for the average person” as an acceptable excuse. If Edward Snowden and Bruce Schneier are going to spout the virtues of the app, I expect it to actually be secure when it matters - when vulnerable people using it to encrypt sensitive communications are targeted by smart and powerful adversaries....it’s your responsibility to clearly explain the drawbacks and advantages of the tradeoffs you make. If you make broad and inaccurate statements about your communications product being “secure”, then when the political prisoners who believed you are being tortured and hanged, it’s on you.
  - tptacek 6y ago
    Which is pretty rich, because in the post where that quote originally appeared, the author recommended as an alternative to Signal a tool that wasn't even end-to-end encrypted by default.
    - Shared404 6y ago
      A) I see that nowhere in this post, so the author must have retracted it when he found that out. B) Matrix has always been very easy to set up E2E C) Matrix is now E2E by default, at least with the client non-technical users will be using. I think it is for the other clients as well, but I do not know for sure.
      - tptacek 6y ago
        Yes, the author ghost-edited it out of his post, months later. You can see the original on Archive.org. Matrix was years from being E2E by default when this post, and that recommendation, was written.
        Shared404 6y ago
        > Yes, the author ghost-edited it out of his post, months later. It was still removed. Would it have been better to leave a note saying it had been? Yes. Nobody is perfect however. > Matrix was years from being E2E by default when this post, and that recommendation, was written. See point B from my other comment. Edit: Add Would ... however.
        tptacek 6y ago
        I'm not sure how point B is relevant. Obviously, every message board argument about bad UX is going to feature someone saying that the UX is just fine. Telling vulnerable users to adopt a tool that is default plaintext is malpractice.
        Shared404 6y ago
        Whenever I moved my friends onto Matrix, all I had to do was hit the "Encrypt room" button for each of our rooms. They did not have to do anything else. Is this ideal? No. Is it E2E for their other rooms? No. Is it E2E for any usage of matrix they were going to be doing? Yes. I also told them to be sure to hit that button if they did start any other rooms. None of them ever did, but they knew that they should if they cared about being secure. Riot.im also did a good job of letting you know that it was unencrypted unless you hit that button. Edit: What it boils down to, is that Matrix has been easy to set up E2E for as long as I can remember. It is also trivial to create a matrix account with no tie to your IRL self.
    - ColanR 6y ago
      > in the post where that quote originally appeared, the author recommended as an alternative to Signal a tool that wasn't even end-to-end encrypted by default You seem really hung up on that. A transient recommendation has very little to do with stated expectation that "a tool which claims to be secure [should] actually be secure".
      - tptacek 6y ago
        Yes, I take secure messenger recommendations seriously; bad ones get people hurt. Tfiles have been passed around about the harm that has come to people using two other then-popular "secure" messengers. (Matrix is very cool and I think it has a bright future as an IRC replacement and ultimately, perhaps, a Slack competitor --- something that provides opsec suitable for a commercial setting. I always come across as a Matrix hater in these threads, and I do not hate Matrix, and wish the project well.)
- 0d9eooo 6y ago
  I sincerely appreciate this blog post and discussion, as it raises a lot of important and compelling points, but I wish it had had some discussion of alternatives and why. To me, messaging is a mess at the moment, somewhat like IoT because of lack of solid widely adopted standards (either de facto or de jure). It's extremely difficult to get friends and family to use something. Most decisions are driven by secondary considerations, like it comes with an OS, or as part of an email or office system, or a gaming system. In some cases it's because "it's what everyone is using". This shifts the threshold a bit in terms of concerns. What I mean by that is given the inertia involved in moving people to use a messaging system, the bar gets raised in terms of moving people off because of network effects. It's hard enough to get any friends or family to use Signal as an alternative to other things; convincing them to switch again introduces other problems. I'd prefer something that can be used in more decentralized way, but that has its own issues in terms of syncing and always-on problems. And as security increases, more and more inconveniences are introduced -- it might be worth it, but the case still has to be made implicitly or explicitly to friends and family. Again, not saying these kinds of discussions shouldn't happen, but they often seem kind of theoretical to me or like they're missing the point because of bigger issues with the messaging ecosystem in general. If you're not going to be able to use Signal anyway because everyone you know is using Whatsapp or iMessaging, or feel like messenger use is driven by "whatever is most popular" it feels like it's difficult to weigh things like "won't put on fdroid". I'd love to see it on fdroid but where does that rank?
  - ncmncm 6y ago
    My son has eight different IM things on his phone, counting Signal/SMS as just one. There is Element, Discord, and a bunch of others, that all warble and chime at him.
- rglullis 6y ago
  I don't buy it. I've been running my own Matrix homeserver and giving access to non-techy members of my family for years already. Setting up e2e is not automatic, but nothing that my mother couldn't do after 5 minutes of hand-holding. It is on us with tech skills to help others to get out of any centralized alternative. Ease of use will come with the less technical user base.
  - dmitriid 6y ago
    It's on us as tech users to create solutions that don't require 5 minutes of hand holding with every user of software and call it an achievement.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      Yes, you are absolutely right. No, it does not invalidate what I am saying. If we keep expecting underfunded and under-resourced parties to come up with software ready and with absolute feature-parity over what is being pushed by the companies that have time, money and marketing teams, we are never going to make a dent on mindshare of the general public. If on the other hand are diligent in refusing for centralized alternatives while willing to learn and emulate what they do right, then we will at the very least be in a state of steady progress. Matrix and Synapse from two years ago where way worse than they are today. I am confident that in two years from now it will be even better and easier than it is today. Facebook/Google Meet/MS Teams/Skype from two years ago was centralized and closed, just as I expect them to be closed two years from now.
      - dmitriid 6y ago
        > absolute feature-parity over what is being pushed by the companies that have time, money and marketing teams Signal started as any other startup. And yet ;) > while willing to learn and emulate what they do right, then we will at the very least be in a state of steady progress In total agreement with you
        rglullis 6y ago
AnonHP 6y ago
Depends on what you want. If you want Signal-like security and everything it offers on avoiding collecting data that it can view/analyze, then I'm guessing nothing. Maybe Matrix (matrix.org) with E2E is close enough. Wire (wire.com) is another one that has better features than Signal and also has E2E for all conversations.
parliament32 6y ago
There is no alternative. Signal has its downfalls but it's still the gold standard in secure messaging on mobile, unless you're willing to accept some pretty substantial tradeoffs.
briffle 6y ago
Considering the first few pages of text of this guys problems with signal is it heavily encourages (but does not require) the google app store to install and update the app, I'm guessing he would really freak out on an apple device, where there is no tools that really let you bypass the apple store, and services.
Youden 6y ago
Personally I use Matrix [0], specifically the Element client [1] which was previously known as Riot. Among other features, it has end-to-end encryption, federation, comprehensive support for multiple devices and doesn't require a phone number. Basically, as far as I'm concerned, it has all of Signal's security but none of its flaws. For the Android folks, it's available on F-Droid as well as the Play Store. Surprisingly, despite the features and security, it's approachable enough that my mostly tech illiterate wife is able to handle it without issues. [0]: https://matrix.org/ https://matrix.org/ [1]: https://element.io/ https://element.io/
- codethief 6y ago
  > it has all of Signal's security but none of its flaws. What about metadata protection? Whenever I hear people talk about how unsupportive Signal / Moxie is of federation and how federation would be better for everyone's privacy, my question is this: In case of Signal you only need to trust one provider (Signal) with your metadata (who's talking to whom) whereas with a federated network you have to trust your provider and all providers your friends use. On top of that Signal has a track record of standing in for their users' privacy[0]. That probably can't be said about the administrator of some random Matrix server. [0]: https://signal.org/bigbrother/eastern-virginia-grand-jury/ https://signal.org/bigbrother/eastern-virginia-grand-jury/
  - Youden 6y ago
    > whereas with a federated network you have to trust your provider and all providers your friends use. Currently, yes, you're right. However Matrix is actively working on eliminating this problem in various ways. The most recent reference I know of is [0]. However I don't think the state of things today leaves a clear winner. Right now it's a tradeoff. You can either trust Signal and put all of your communications in the hands of a single third-party (so single point of failure) or you can use Matrix and deal with the levels of trust you're happy to place in your friends' homeservers (but gain multiple points of failure). [0]: https://fosdem.org/2020/schedule/event/dip_p2p_matrix/ https://fosdem.org/2020/schedule/event/dip_p2p_matrix/

There is no alternative that provides the ease of use and privacy guarantees. I think the OWS/Moxie hate is misplaced. They’re competing with iMessage and WhatsApp and Instagram and Facebook, and Signal is a much better option than all of those. Let’s be honest: the alternative is that Facebook gets all of our chats in cleartext.

ColanR 6y ago
I think Drew responded to that. I thought this was a key quote: > Off the bat, let me explain that I expect a tool which claims to be secure to actually be secure. I don’t view “but that makes it harder for the average person” as an acceptable excuse. If Edward Snowden and Bruce Schneier are going to spout the virtues of the app, I expect it to actually be secure when it matters - when vulnerable people using it to encrypt sensitive communications are targeted by smart and powerful adversaries....it’s your responsibility to clearly explain the drawbacks and advantages of the tradeoffs you make. If you make broad and inaccurate statements about your communications product being “secure”, then when the political prisoners who believed you are being tortured and hanged, it’s on you.
- tptacek 6y ago
  Which is pretty rich, because in the post where that quote originally appeared, the author recommended as an alternative to Signal a tool that wasn't even end-to-end encrypted by default.
  - Shared404 6y ago
    A) I see that nowhere in this post, so the author must have retracted it when he found that out. B) Matrix has always been very easy to set up E2E C) Matrix is now E2E by default, at least with the client non-technical users will be using. I think it is for the other clients as well, but I do not know for sure.
    - tptacek 6y ago
      Yes, the author ghost-edited it out of his post, months later. You can see the original on Archive.org. Matrix was years from being E2E by default when this post, and that recommendation, was written.
      - Shared404 6y ago
        > Yes, the author ghost-edited it out of his post, months later. It was still removed. Would it have been better to leave a note saying it had been? Yes. Nobody is perfect however. > Matrix was years from being E2E by default when this post, and that recommendation, was written. See point B from my other comment. Edit: Add Would ... however.
        tptacek 6y ago
        I'm not sure how point B is relevant. Obviously, every message board argument about bad UX is going to feature someone saying that the UX is just fine. Telling vulnerable users to adopt a tool that is default plaintext is malpractice.
        Shared404 6y ago
        Whenever I moved my friends onto Matrix, all I had to do was hit the "Encrypt room" button for each of our rooms. They did not have to do anything else. Is this ideal? No. Is it E2E for their other rooms? No. Is it E2E for any usage of matrix they were going to be doing? Yes. I also told them to be sure to hit that button if they did start any other rooms. None of them ever did, but they knew that they should if they cared about being secure. Riot.im also did a good job of letting you know that it was unencrypted unless you hit that button. Edit: What it boils down to, is that Matrix has been easy to set up E2E for as long as I can remember. It is also trivial to create a matrix account with no tie to your IRL self.
  - ColanR 6y ago
    > in the post where that quote originally appeared, the author recommended as an alternative to Signal a tool that wasn't even end-to-end encrypted by default You seem really hung up on that. A transient recommendation has very little to do with stated expectation that "a tool which claims to be secure [should] actually be secure".
    - tptacek 6y ago
      Yes, I take secure messenger recommendations seriously; bad ones get people hurt. Tfiles have been passed around about the harm that has come to people using two other then-popular "secure" messengers. (Matrix is very cool and I think it has a bright future as an IRC replacement and ultimately, perhaps, a Slack competitor --- something that provides opsec suitable for a commercial setting. I always come across as a Matrix hater in these threads, and I do not hate Matrix, and wish the project well.)
0d9eooo 6y ago
I sincerely appreciate this blog post and discussion, as it raises a lot of important and compelling points, but I wish it had had some discussion of alternatives and why. To me, messaging is a mess at the moment, somewhat like IoT because of lack of solid widely adopted standards (either de facto or de jure). It's extremely difficult to get friends and family to use something. Most decisions are driven by secondary considerations, like it comes with an OS, or as part of an email or office system, or a gaming system. In some cases it's because "it's what everyone is using". This shifts the threshold a bit in terms of concerns. What I mean by that is given the inertia involved in moving people to use a messaging system, the bar gets raised in terms of moving people off because of network effects. It's hard enough to get any friends or family to use Signal as an alternative to other things; convincing them to switch again introduces other problems. I'd prefer something that can be used in more decentralized way, but that has its own issues in terms of syncing and always-on problems. And as security increases, more and more inconveniences are introduced -- it might be worth it, but the case still has to be made implicitly or explicitly to friends and family. Again, not saying these kinds of discussions shouldn't happen, but they often seem kind of theoretical to me or like they're missing the point because of bigger issues with the messaging ecosystem in general. If you're not going to be able to use Signal anyway because everyone you know is using Whatsapp or iMessaging, or feel like messenger use is driven by "whatever is most popular" it feels like it's difficult to weigh things like "won't put on fdroid". I'd love to see it on fdroid but where does that rank?
- ncmncm 6y ago
  My son has eight different IM things on his phone, counting Signal/SMS as just one. There is Element, Discord, and a bunch of others, that all warble and chime at him.
rglullis 6y ago
I don't buy it. I've been running my own Matrix homeserver and giving access to non-techy members of my family for years already. Setting up e2e is not automatic, but nothing that my mother couldn't do after 5 minutes of hand-holding. It is on us with tech skills to help others to get out of any centralized alternative. Ease of use will come with the less technical user base.
- dmitriid 6y ago
  It's on us as tech users to create solutions that don't require 5 minutes of hand holding with every user of software and call it an achievement.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    Yes, you are absolutely right. No, it does not invalidate what I am saying. If we keep expecting underfunded and under-resourced parties to come up with software ready and with absolute feature-parity over what is being pushed by the companies that have time, money and marketing teams, we are never going to make a dent on mindshare of the general public. If on the other hand are diligent in refusing for centralized alternatives while willing to learn and emulate what they do right, then we will at the very least be in a state of steady progress. Matrix and Synapse from two years ago where way worse than they are today. I am confident that in two years from now it will be even better and easier than it is today. Facebook/Google Meet/MS Teams/Skype from two years ago was centralized and closed, just as I expect them to be closed two years from now.
    - dmitriid 6y ago
      > absolute feature-parity over what is being pushed by the companies that have time, money and marketing teams Signal started as any other startup. And yet ;) > while willing to learn and emulate what they do right, then we will at the very least be in a state of steady progress In total agreement with you
      - rglullis 6y ago

AnonHP 6y ago

Depends on what you want. If you want Signal-like security and everything it offers on avoiding collecting data that it can view/analyze, then I'm guessing nothing. Maybe Matrix (matrix.org) with E2E is close enough. Wire (wire.com) is another one that has better features than Signal and also has E2E for all conversations.

parliament32 6y ago

There is no alternative. Signal has its downfalls but it's still the gold standard in secure messaging on mobile, unless you're willing to accept some pretty substantial tradeoffs.

briffle 6y ago

Considering the first few pages of text of this guys problems with signal is it heavily encourages (but does not require) the google app store to install and update the app, I'm guessing he would really freak out on an apple device, where there is no tools that really let you bypass the apple store, and services.

Youden 6y ago

Personally I use Matrix [0], specifically the Element client [1] which was previously known as Riot. Among other features, it has end-to-end encryption, federation, comprehensive support for multiple devices and doesn't require a phone number. Basically, as far as I'm concerned, it has all of Signal's security but none of its flaws. For the Android folks, it's available on F-Droid as well as the Play Store. Surprisingly, despite the features and security, it's approachable enough that my mostly tech illiterate wife is able to handle it without issues. [0]: https://matrix.org/ https://matrix.org/ [1]: https://element.io/ https://element.io/

codethief 6y ago
> it has all of Signal's security but none of its flaws. What about metadata protection? Whenever I hear people talk about how unsupportive Signal / Moxie is of federation and how federation would be better for everyone's privacy, my question is this: In case of Signal you only need to trust one provider (Signal) with your metadata (who's talking to whom) whereas with a federated network you have to trust your provider and all providers your friends use. On top of that Signal has a track record of standing in for their users' privacy[0]. That probably can't be said about the administrator of some random Matrix server. [0]: https://signal.org/bigbrother/eastern-virginia-grand-jury/ https://signal.org/bigbrother/eastern-virginia-grand-jury/
- Youden 6y ago
  > whereas with a federated network you have to trust your provider and all providers your friends use. Currently, yes, you're right. However Matrix is actively working on eliminating this problem in various ways. The most recent reference I know of is [0]. However I don't think the state of things today leaves a clear winner. Right now it's a tradeoff. You can either trust Signal and put all of your communications in the hands of a single third-party (so single point of failure) or you can use Matrix and deal with the levels of trust you're happy to place in your friends' homeservers (but gain multiple points of failure). [0]: https://fosdem.org/2020/schedule/event/dip_p2p_matrix/ https://fosdem.org/2020/schedule/event/dip_p2p_matrix/