5 ms·

Signal desktop was missing basic features like answering calls not long ago. It also had at least one significant vulnerability (some code injection IIRC) so I

by simias 6y ago

Signal desktop was missing basic features like answering calls not long ago. It also had at least one significant vulnerability (some code injection IIRC) so I don't know if I'd say that it does "encryption well". Having applications with such a needlessly huge attack surface is not good crypto in my book. I do like Signal, otherwise I wouldn't put up with that software. But you can both enjoy the protocol and Android client and think that the desktop app is a pile a donkey dung.

harry8 6y ago
>desktop app is a pile a donkey dung. And you can put the stated criticisms of it in proper context. Then assess the costs and risks to yourself. Compare its use along with the rest of signal to the alternatives. And examine the response of Moxies team to issues. At least that's what I did and came up with a "Hard Disagree" on that statement. Signal desktop is pretty good. (And no I don't like electron apps as a rule - it's the only one I use). Deviation from perfection is not donkey dung. >Signal desktop was missing basic features like answering [voice] calls... vs Messaging on phone and internet everywhere was missing end to end encryption before Signal. (Yes I used OTR with like 3 people, now I encryption with almost everyone, thanks signal). Advantage signal. By a huge margin, for mine. Picked the essential feature. Got it right. Expanded from there. I find it pretty hard to fault what they're doing. People who want to do it differently because they think it's "better" (eg federation), don't seem to actually get much done in comparison to signal's massive win they chalked up for all of us. I find it kinda odd that here, where people understand tech, there is more sticking up for facebrick, goo, appletax etc when they screw their users yet again than there is for Signal doing the opposite. The contrast between how they view people who use their stuff is very, very stark. Signal are pretty great. We need more love for anyone who can achieve at a similar level to make computing better for us. To push competition toward being better at privacy, security and so on and away from the direction of turnkey totalitarianism surveillance that the Stasi could only have wet dreams about. Alarmist right? Could bad things really happen here? Are the interests of Cook, Zuck, Seregey, Larry, Jeff et al not precisely yours or a wider population's? They all do seem really quite friendly to despotic regimes. But I guess those reigimes are foreign?
- simias 6y ago
  The Signal devs have always been extremely hostile to anybody making third party clients, because they say they know better than everybody else. Instead of making a library or daemon that could interoperate with third party software and decently built messengers, they preferred to create their own Moxie Approved(tm) bloated elecron crap. So be it. But then when their software is crap I won't just accept the "well at least it's not Facebook" defense.
  - harry8 6y ago
    They've given their reasons for why they have the policies they do. If they were bad reasons somebody else would have made something that makes signal redundant. Somebody will make signal redundant one day. When I look at it I see that day has not come. When it does the world is a better place for the advances made by signal. The decisions they've made are /why/ signal is the leader of the pack by a margin. But please do make better ones. Please do give us something better than signal. Their libraries are all capital F Free. Go for it. Crapping on them from the sideline, sure, go ahead but acknowledge they've done rather better than /anyone/ else in this space. It's not even close. So maybe their decisions are worth considering as having some merit? Disagree sure, but really. They've done it. Well. I haven't. Nobody else has. I don't like electron. The desktop client works well for me on linux and for non-techy family members on mainstream consumer machines. There's some merit there you're completely discounting which doesn't seem quite fair. And it's not "At least it's not facebook" It is: "Whatsapp now is end to end encrypted thanks to signal" and "new players have to match signal's encryption" That's crap loads more than "at least it's not facebook" that's actually good as opposed less evil. Straight to heaven for achieving that, for mine.
    - johnchristopher 6y ago
      What are your thoughts on session which uses blockchain tech to remove the need for a phone number ? I don't care about the blockchain tech in session but would session be a good candidate to a signal replacement ?

by simias 6y ago

harry8 6y ago

>desktop app is a pile a donkey dung. And you can put the stated criticisms of it in proper context. Then assess the costs and risks to yourself. Compare its use along with the rest of signal to the alternatives. And examine the response of Moxies team to issues. At least that's what I did and came up with a "Hard Disagree" on that statement. Signal desktop is pretty good. (And no I don't like electron apps as a rule - it's the only one I use). Deviation from perfection is not donkey dung. >Signal desktop was missing basic features like answering [voice] calls... vs Messaging on phone and internet everywhere was missing end to end encryption before Signal. (Yes I used OTR with like 3 people, now I encryption with almost everyone, thanks signal). Advantage signal. By a huge margin, for mine. Picked the essential feature. Got it right. Expanded from there. I find it pretty hard to fault what they're doing. People who want to do it differently because they think it's "better" (eg federation), don't seem to actually get much done in comparison to signal's massive win they chalked up for all of us. I find it kinda odd that here, where people understand tech, there is more sticking up for facebrick, goo, appletax etc when they screw their users yet again than there is for Signal doing the opposite. The contrast between how they view people who use their stuff is very, very stark. Signal are pretty great. We need more love for anyone who can achieve at a similar level to make computing better for us. To push competition toward being better at privacy, security and so on and away from the direction of turnkey totalitarianism surveillance that the Stasi could only have wet dreams about. Alarmist right? Could bad things really happen here? Are the interests of Cook, Zuck, Seregey, Larry, Jeff et al not precisely yours or a wider population's? They all do seem really quite friendly to despotic regimes. But I guess those reigimes are foreign?

simias 6y ago
The Signal devs have always been extremely hostile to anybody making third party clients, because they say they know better than everybody else. Instead of making a library or daemon that could interoperate with third party software and decently built messengers, they preferred to create their own Moxie Approved(tm) bloated elecron crap. So be it. But then when their software is crap I won't just accept the "well at least it's not Facebook" defense.
- harry8 6y ago
  They've given their reasons for why they have the policies they do. If they were bad reasons somebody else would have made something that makes signal redundant. Somebody will make signal redundant one day. When I look at it I see that day has not come. When it does the world is a better place for the advances made by signal. The decisions they've made are /why/ signal is the leader of the pack by a margin. But please do make better ones. Please do give us something better than signal. Their libraries are all capital F Free. Go for it. Crapping on them from the sideline, sure, go ahead but acknowledge they've done rather better than /anyone/ else in this space. It's not even close. So maybe their decisions are worth considering as having some merit? Disagree sure, but really. They've done it. Well. I haven't. Nobody else has. I don't like electron. The desktop client works well for me on linux and for non-techy family members on mainstream consumer machines. There's some merit there you're completely discounting which doesn't seem quite fair. And it's not "At least it's not facebook" It is: "Whatsapp now is end to end encrypted thanks to signal" and "new players have to match signal's encryption" That's crap loads more than "at least it's not facebook" that's actually good as opposed less evil. Straight to heaven for achieving that, for mine.
  - johnchristopher 6y ago
    What are your thoughts on session which uses blockchain tech to remove the need for a phone number ? I don't care about the blockchain tech in session but would session be a good candidate to a signal replacement ?