6 ms·

I think it's astute of you to point out that the Signal developers do not value chat history the same way many people do, but I am not sure I track with this:

I think it's astute of you to point out that the Signal developers do not value chat history the same way many people do, but I am not sure I track with this: > It's not a technical issue - they just think you're wrong when you want to keep your conversations. as much. When you are treating security as a number one priority I think there are a lot of things that become technical issues which aren't typically. Transferring or backing up history between disparate devices, which become trusted at different times, is one of those things that I think _is_ difficult to do without sacrificing security. For example, in the classic case when a user adds a new device and wants history to be available on both you can't let the devices controlled by one person simply sync with one another. To do so would be making a security concession to the other members of the chat in that they no longer verify every destination of their message. If you are unwilling to make a security concession everything in this area becomes magnitudes more difficult. I wouldn't say it is impossible, but it's definitely not trivial. My gut reaction is also that it is difficult to _guarantee_ history in this type of security first mindset. If you add a new device and someone doesn't approve/verify/trade encryption keys with the additional client then there isn't much you can do besides not make that data available no? So I don't think it unreasonable for developers to hold the mindset that history is not a priority for a security first application.

verytrivial 6y ago
It's a bit of a cart before the horse issue, no? I mean what is the point of obsessing about the security of the messages if you don't value the messages themselves? Some people[1] clearly value message history far beyond the transfer point to chat itself, and making people choose between being spied upon and not having message history, I think many people will choose trusting that they won't lose their messages. [1] Myself included. I check with Signal[2] every six months to see if they have a backup option, then switch back to WhatsApp when I see they don't. Phones die. My messages are more important than my phone. [2] https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba...
- mandelbrotwurst 6y ago
  There is still value in being able to securely communicate in the present even if you are not able to maintain a permanently searchable log of all activity.
  - tinco 6y ago
    Yes, but less value. And most would say not enough value.
  - FalconSensei 6y ago
    There's value, that's why some niches migrated to Signal. But the general population seems to think they are losing features, instead of gaining, that's why they don't migrate/are upset and surprised when they lose history
  - mderazon 6y ago
    That's right. I actually have all my conversations on Signal self disappear after a week
- skinkestek 6y ago
  Signal isn't meant to be a mainstream one-size-fits-all, even tptacek admits as much: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22371316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22371316 He actually seemed annoyed that everyone insisted on using it for everything :-) If you need bulletproof cryptographically verifiable encryption - use Signal. If one wants to plan dinner, use whatever fits your bill. (And if in addition to the same supposedly bulletproof encryption as Signal you also want NSA^HGoogle to back up your messages and Facebook to know who you talk to and when so they might better customize their ads^H^H^H your experience you can also use WhatsApp :-)
  - Yeroc 6y ago
    The downside of that attitude is that if a chat program is only used for what governments consider subversive activities then it will be targeted to be shutdown. It is much better to have a general-purpose, secure chat program that IS mainstream making it more difficult for oppressive regimes to target.
vinay_ys 6y ago
I think it is fair to expect Signal to support a solid encrypted backup/sync mechanism. They can allow users to manage the encryption keys out of band. Users can use a password manager (or a piece of paper) to save the encryption key. Anyone who is security/privacy conscious to use Signal is also using a solid password manager and not reusing passwords as well as following good secure data backup practice, I hope.
k1t 6y ago
> For example, in the classic case when a user adds a new device and wants history to be available on both you can't let the devices controlled by one person simply sync with one another. > To do so would be making a security concession to the other members of the chat in that they no longer verify every destination of their message. You can't "verify every destination" with Signal anyway. Maybe the message is going to my phone, maybe it's going to my phone and my desktop - the sender can't tell. Sure, if you are trying to add an entirely new recipient to a conversation, then of course you can't send them the entire conversation history - but nobody is asking for that. What people want is the ability to add a new device for an existing recipient, and have the history sync across. With Signal I can already add a new device and continue existing conversations without the other participants being notified that I've added a new device. Adding conversation history doesn't diminish anything from a security perspective.
- gshulegaard 6y ago
  Are you sure about this? > With Signal I can already add a new device and continue existing conversations without the other participants being notified that I've added a new device. Just today I had a group chat notification that said: "More than one member of this group is no longer marked as verified. Tap for options" Tapping brought me to a menu that said: "Safety Number Changes -- The following people many have reinstalled or changed devices. Verify your safety number with them to ensure privacy" At which point I was given the option to re-verify (e.g. via a provided QR code), but also the option to manually mark "verified". That is to say something does notify participants of changes to recipient devices.
  - smichel17 6y ago
    Signal still had a single primary device, your phone. What you describe happens when someone installs Signal on a new phone (or reinstalls on the current one). Linked devices are different. There is no notification when someone adds a new linked device. That's because the only way to add a linked device is to scan a QR code on the device with your phone, then confirm you want to add the device. The device is implicitly trusted, because only a trusted device can add it. (It is also possible to trigger the re-verification from the desktop manually by clicking "reset secure season" in the conversation menu, but that's separate from adding a device.) Aside: Implicit trust like this is a great trade-off, because otherwise you'd have to verify each of their devices from each of your devices, which means approximately nobody will ever do it. Ask anybody who used Matrix/Element E2EE prior to a couple months ago ;D.

verytrivial 6y ago

It's a bit of a cart before the horse issue, no? I mean what is the point of obsessing about the security of the messages if you don't value the messages themselves? Some people[1] clearly value message history far beyond the transfer point to chat itself, and making people choose between being spied upon and not having message history, I think many people will choose trusting that they won't lose their messages. [1] Myself included. I check with Signal[2] every six months to see if they have a backup option, then switch back to WhatsApp when I see they don't. Phones die. My messages are more important than my phone. [2] https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba...

mandelbrotwurst 6y ago
There is still value in being able to securely communicate in the present even if you are not able to maintain a permanently searchable log of all activity.
- tinco 6y ago
  Yes, but less value. And most would say not enough value.
- FalconSensei 6y ago
  There's value, that's why some niches migrated to Signal. But the general population seems to think they are losing features, instead of gaining, that's why they don't migrate/are upset and surprised when they lose history
- mderazon 6y ago
  That's right. I actually have all my conversations on Signal self disappear after a week
skinkestek 6y ago
Signal isn't meant to be a mainstream one-size-fits-all, even tptacek admits as much: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22371316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22371316 He actually seemed annoyed that everyone insisted on using it for everything :-) If you need bulletproof cryptographically verifiable encryption - use Signal. If one wants to plan dinner, use whatever fits your bill. (And if in addition to the same supposedly bulletproof encryption as Signal you also want NSA^HGoogle to back up your messages and Facebook to know who you talk to and when so they might better customize their ads^H^H^H your experience you can also use WhatsApp :-)
- Yeroc 6y ago
  The downside of that attitude is that if a chat program is only used for what governments consider subversive activities then it will be targeted to be shutdown. It is much better to have a general-purpose, secure chat program that IS mainstream making it more difficult for oppressive regimes to target.

vinay_ys 6y ago

I think it is fair to expect Signal to support a solid encrypted backup/sync mechanism. They can allow users to manage the encryption keys out of band. Users can use a password manager (or a piece of paper) to save the encryption key. Anyone who is security/privacy conscious to use Signal is also using a solid password manager and not reusing passwords as well as following good secure data backup practice, I hope.

k1t 6y ago

> For example, in the classic case when a user adds a new device and wants history to be available on both you can't let the devices controlled by one person simply sync with one another. > To do so would be making a security concession to the other members of the chat in that they no longer verify every destination of their message. You can't "verify every destination" with Signal anyway. Maybe the message is going to my phone, maybe it's going to my phone and my desktop - the sender can't tell. Sure, if you are trying to add an entirely new recipient to a conversation, then of course you can't send them the entire conversation history - but nobody is asking for that. What people want is the ability to add a new device for an existing recipient, and have the history sync across. With Signal I can already add a new device and continue existing conversations without the other participants being notified that I've added a new device. Adding conversation history doesn't diminish anything from a security perspective.

gshulegaard 6y ago
Are you sure about this? > With Signal I can already add a new device and continue existing conversations without the other participants being notified that I've added a new device. Just today I had a group chat notification that said: "More than one member of this group is no longer marked as verified. Tap for options" Tapping brought me to a menu that said: "Safety Number Changes -- The following people many have reinstalled or changed devices. Verify your safety number with them to ensure privacy" At which point I was given the option to re-verify (e.g. via a provided QR code), but also the option to manually mark "verified". That is to say something does notify participants of changes to recipient devices.
- smichel17 6y ago
  Signal still had a single primary device, your phone. What you describe happens when someone installs Signal on a new phone (or reinstalls on the current one). Linked devices are different. There is no notification when someone adds a new linked device. That's because the only way to add a linked device is to scan a QR code on the device with your phone, then confirm you want to add the device. The device is implicitly trusted, because only a trusted device can add it. (It is also possible to trigger the re-verification from the desktop manually by clicking "reset secure season" in the conversation menu, but that's separate from adding a device.) Aside: Implicit trust like this is a great trade-off, because otherwise you'd have to verify each of their devices from each of your devices, which means approximately nobody will ever do it. Ask anybody who used Matrix/Element E2EE prior to a couple months ago ;D.