18 ms·

It looks like Signal isn't as open source as you thought it was anymore

242 points by raybb 6y ago

zaik 6y ago
A good opportunity to switch to a decentralised protocol like XMPP where no single entity can control the client and server you have to use to participate in the network.
ndiscussion 6y ago
It's been like this for a while, and the project owner's attitude is pretty negative overall. I do use signal daily, but I believe it's likely compromised ala lavabit.
- morelisp 6y ago
  What's in the Signal server to be compromised?
  - corty 6y ago
    List of phone numbers? Pairs of communication partners? Timing and size of messages? Metadata about transferred media? There is still a lot, sufficient for targeting a drone strike as the usual wisdom goes.
    - tptacek 6y ago
      Some of that information you don't even need a backdoor to collect; the rest is stored in plaintext by Signal's competitors.
      - corty 6y ago
        Signal claims to specially protect some of that data, such claims need verification. Storing or not storing that data needs verification, without the trust that they do what they say they are no better than their competition. Trust is earned e.g. by openness about the source code. And that a server backdoor isn't strictly necessary is also beside the point because the server is the easiest and most obvious way to get at all that data. Also, there is competition like Briar which has less of those pesky metadata problems (but some other problems instead)
        tptacek 6y ago
        I don't recall Signal ever having made implausible claims about traffic analytic attacks. I also don't buy into the idea that platforms are as trustworthy as their source release policies are orthodox.
        corty 6y ago
        It isn't advanced difficult traffic analysis if it is all your servers. Or all your logs landing in one logstash.
        tptacek 6y ago
        What difference does this make? In your threat model the only serious countermeasure between you and state-level adversaries is a Logstash implementation?
        morelisp 6y ago
        The goalposts now seem to be at "someone might subpoena Signal's logs for some metadata", having moved pretty far from the original claim of "Signal's server code hasn't been updated because it has been secretly backdoored or intentionally weakened." It's difficult to see this as good faith security analysis rather than fearmongering.
    - ViViDboarder 6y ago
      Signal doesn’t store lists of phone governments have lists of phone numbers. Comunication partners are hidden from the server using Sealed Sender for many conversations. The rest of this could possibly be obtained, it it wouldn’t require a patch to the server as message sizes and timestamps likely appear on disk somewhere. Though the data is encrypted, you could tell “x received a message from some party (sealed sender prevents knowing who) at y time of roughly z size”.
      - corty 6y ago
        Signal still uses and verifies phone numbers, so at some point they will pass through their infrastructure. They could still save them, knowing the source code they use gives at least at hint that they don't. Sealed sender also is based on the pinky-swear that the infrastructure distributing the sender auth certificates doesn't correlate identities and connections with the messaging infrastructure. And that the server receiving the enveloped messages doesn't log. So all based on trust based on believing the right source code is running somewhere. When access to that source code is restricted suddenly, of course people are worried.
    - pvarangot 6y ago
      Being able to hide from a government that wants to drone you while still being in the cellphone network requires much much much more OPSEC than just using Signal. For an average user Signal is about protecting the content of your messages, not your network, and it's good at that.
      - corty 6y ago
        Yes, that "drone strike" thing is actually a stupid saying. I'm sorry to have used it because it is somewhat distracting from the actual points.
  - ndiscussion 6y ago
    If you use the Signal app from the app stores, and communicate with the server, you are using 100% closed source software. They could easily add a backdoor in the client despite the fact that it's "open source", because no one builds it from source.
    - morelisp 6y ago
      Are Signal's Android builds no longer reproducible?
      - ndiscussion 6y ago
        It looks like they are, but there might be a minor issue in verifying the content: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/10476 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/10476 But despite best efforts by the community to verify builds, Google and Apple can be forced to upload a malicious app to a particular user, meaning they aren't using the same app at all.
        morelisp 6y ago
        If your threat model includes the ability to force Apple to do X, then Signal is irrelevant.
        ndiscussion 6y ago
        That's probably a good point, I'm using GrapheneOS which is not identifiable to Google/Apple and can't be singled out for updates.
        greysonp 6y ago
        > But despite best efforts by the community to verify builds, Google and Apple can be forced to upload a malicious app to a particular user, meaning they aren't using the same app at all. Hi there! Signal-Android developer here. App signing verification is done at the OS-level, and Google does not have our signing key, so they wouldn't be able to give an existing user a different APK and have it successfully install.
- gruez 6y ago
  I thought they were never compromised? They shut down rather than comply with the order >The service suspended its operations on August 8, 2013 after the U.S. Federal Government ordered it to turn over its Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) private keys, in order to allow the government to spy on Edward Snowden's email
  - ndiscussion 6y ago
    Lavabit was never compromised, I'm saying that Signal may have been compromised by the feds, instead of choosing to shut down. Feds may have learned their lesson and not provided an option this time.
    - notjtrig 6y ago
      The chance that a small nonprofit with so much traffic is not leaking/providing data to the feds is astronomically slim imho, there are so many actors who would love to there hands on it. Maybe it thwarts some inteligance services but not those with unlimited resources.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
        Based on what information would you draw such a conclusion?
        notjtrig 6y ago
        I would point you towards Stuxnet and take a look at how sofisticated a state level attack can be and the fact that today Iran still can not keep us (America/Israel) out of it's centrifuges. Everything you type online is being stored by multiple actors, to think they can't access a small company with limited resources is wishful thinking. If no one in Signal's 180 employees is working for the feds I would be embarrassed to be an American.
- coolspot 6y ago
  Add easily-bruteforceable PIN-codes forced on users, protected only by vulnerable Intel SGX. Add requirement of a phone number to create an account.
- rOOb85 6y ago
  That's a bold claim with 0 data to back that up. What are your sources for believing it's received a love letter?
rvz 6y ago
> While it regularly publishes the code of its client apps, it hasn't updated the Github repository for its server for almost a year. Last commit was 5 days ago: [0] As for not playing nice with third-party clients, I can give you that point. [0] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/365ad3a4f821a9e2393c5a3e1522b2c03b9dfe40 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/365ad3a4f8...
- RL_Quine 6y ago
  This is a change that's very recent, perhaps even in response to this article in particular. https://web.archive.org/web/20210311053716/https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server https://web.archive.org/web/20210311053716/https://github.co... As of earlier this month, the repository was a year out of date.
  - rvz 6y ago
    True, but the author of the blog post posted this '1 hour ago' (As of my comment) and maybe should have at least triple-checked the signal-server repository again rather than linking to a now outdated discussion thread on Signal-Android [0]. [0] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/11101#issuecomment-798900367 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/11101#iss...
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      If you read that thread, it's very possible the change happened in that hour. It seems to have been at some point today. I think a member of the team made it public ~15 minutes ago if I'm reading correctly.
      - RL_Quine 6y ago
        Google Cache shows that as of Apr 6, 2021 00:16:05 GMT the source had not been updated since 2020, so it happened within the last 6 hours. https://i.imgur.com/r1Y0Wgz.png https://i.imgur.com/r1Y0Wgz.png http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=cache:https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?client=safari&r... Screenshot from twitter showing it not updated "2 hours ago", about 04:43 GMT. https://twitter.com/AnanasPizza2/status/1379474849974910980 https://twitter.com/AnanasPizza2/status/1379474849974910980
Chlorus 6y ago
Wasn't Apple's iMessage protocol supposed to be an open implementation too? Whatever happened to that?
- kitsunesoba 6y ago
  That was FaceTime that they intended to open source, and it was supposedly a patent troll that forced them to move FaceTime to a more centralized design (it was originally P2P) which in turn made open sourcing more problematic.
  - smnrchrds 6y ago
    That was certainly the excuse. But it is trivial for Apple to buy any patent it needs. I believe the real reason is that FaceTime and iMessage hook people to Apple platform and discourage switching to another one.
    - peytn 6y ago
      Wouldn’t that encourage future lawsuits from other patent trolls?
    - viro 6y ago
      > trivial for Apple to buy any patent it needs. Yea ... umm thats not how reality works. Companies CAN refuse to sell or license a patent at a rate that is not absurd.
    - aeontech 6y ago
      The patent troll in the case got a 440M award… and Apple had to spend a bunch of engineering time throwing out the already-working p2p implementation and rebuilding a centralized version… and you’re suggesting that this was all a mere smoke screen?
      - smnrchrds 6y ago
        They have 200 billion dollars in cash. They could have bought out the troll if they wanted to.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
alexfromapex 6y ago
I feel like it’s a honey trap.
- yellowyacht 6y ago
  > I feel like it’s a honey trap That's a serious accusation you are 'feeling'. What evidence do you have?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - poochdog 6y ago
    Tbh, the burden of proof for such a thing lies with Signal.
  - alexfromapex 6y ago
    Why put feeling in quotes? No need to be rude. I guess comments about feeling aren't allowed on HN.
    - yellowyacht 6y ago
      What was serious or negative about my response?
  - BuildTheRobots 6y ago
    Not op, but for me personally the moment it stopped being possible to send an e2e encrypted text message it became suspect. I'm forced to register and to send all messages through their central server. It also seems to scan through my phone book and inform me who else is using signal, even if I've not had contact with them in years. I'm still convinced this is a massive provacy leak. If I check the magic number to verify the security of my encryption with a contact, there's only one number to verify, yet I can have any number of desktop clients attached which seem to be independently capable of decrypting messages with my phone offline. There's also no indication to the sender that their message has been sent to multiple devices or any obvious way of working out where its been seen. There's also been the historical reliance on google services, the holsitlity towards people running their own servers and on occasion general hostility towards devs and end users too. For something that started off as a way of sending p2p e2e encrypted textual communication over the lowest common demoninator protocol worldwide, it's come a long way. Being able to send animated cat gifs to a group is great, but it feels (especially with the server code so far behind and no real way of verifying thats actually what's running anyway) like we're getting further and further from simple & verifiable and more and more into trust us territory, and it seems right to treat that with some suspicion.
bilal4hmed 6y ago
It looks like they had been working on adding MobileCoin support server side https://signal.org/blog/help-us-test-payments-in-signal/ https://signal.org/blog/help-us-test-payments-in-signal/ . Just a few minutes ago the server code was updated. Im honestly not happy about this. Feels yucky
- RL_Quine 6y ago
  Yep the date matches perfectly, they hid the signal-server repository explicitly to keep their MobileCoin integration secret for a year. This is bad even for them.
  - kryogen1c 6y ago
    > they hid how did they hide anything? do you know this code has been in production?
    - dogecoinbase 6y ago
      If this code was _not_ in production, they had known vulnerabilites: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c018d75774ce89f3207b18051c26fe7#comments https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c... There is no interpretation of these events that's a good look, especially for a platform focused on privacy.
      - kryogen1c 6y ago
        we're talking about the code released today.
        dogecoinbase 6y ago
        All of the code was released today. Up until earlier today, the most recent public commit on the repo was https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c018d75774ce89f3207b18051c26fe7 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c... , the commit immediately prior to the previously unseen https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/95f0ce181631fef8b1fdb507b7ecf5b71291ff38 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/95f0ce1816... "Support for advertising payment addresses on profile"
chrisco255 6y ago
Just use Status: https://status.im/private-messenger/ https://status.im/private-messenger/ Mozilla Public License - E2E Encryption - P2P Messaging - Active community & git repo - Integrated Ethereum wallet for Web3 access
- Phobophobia 6y ago
  I wish. Status has even less adoption and dev support. If I have bugs on signal for MMS with my carrier, I presume any smaller niche messenger will be tougher to have loved ones adopt and will have even more bugs.
  - michaelsbradley 6y ago
    Current numbers re: adoption were discussed in Status' most recent Town Hall: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98wsQe6hHHs&t=365s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98wsQe6hHHs&t=365s As for dev support: Status has teams of full-time devs working on various projects related to the mobile[1] and desktop[2] (beta) apps, as well projects that are related to the larger Ethereum ecosystem, e.g. nimbus-eth2[3]. Our teams aren't particularly large, but are working steadily to squash bugs and add/improve features. We also have teams dedicated to UX and design. [1] https://github.com/status-im/status-react https://github.com/status-im/status-react [2] https://github.com/status-im/status-desktop https://github.com/status-im/status-desktop [3] https://github.com/status-im/nimbus-eth2 https://github.com/status-im/nimbus-eth2
- speedgoose 6y ago
  The integrated ethereum wallet is a red flag for me.
  - ubercow13 6y ago
    The messaging itself actually runs on the ethereum network.
    - michaelsbradley 6y ago
sschueller 6y ago
I have asked this before but without an answer. Has anyone been able to successfully do a verified build of a recent version of the Android client? I have not been able to get it to compile but have not spent much time trying to figure out why it doesn't want to compile.
- greysonp 6y ago
  Hi there! Signal-Android developer here. Are you following the steps listed in our repo[1]? The steps use the very same docker image we use to build our releases. [1] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/tree/master/reproducible-builds https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/tree/master/repr...
  - hiq 6y ago
    You have a fix waiting as a PR for what could be OP's issue: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/pull/11134 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/pull/11134
  - sschueller 6y ago
    Yes I did but it was more than 15 days ago. I will try again.
gentleman11 6y ago
What’s new with matrix? Honestly curious, I find federated systems a little confusing and would love an overview
- jeroenhd 6y ago
  Been using it for a while now, mostly through bridges. e2ee works pretty much seamlessly now, as does the entire federation thing. Cross-device verification is simple; manual fingerprint comparisons have been replaced by the simple emoji comparison screens also found in other apps. If you don't want to bother setting up a server (and power to you, because server maintenance is annoying) just register with any open Matrix server you deem reliable enough. The matrix.org one is (obviously) pretty popular. As an end user, the federation stuff is no different from your average email address; there's a domain you store your stuff on and send your stuff through, that server is part of your address. If you make an account with a service provider that goes down, your messages disappear, same thing as would happen if Gmail or iCloud would take their servers down. If you want the security of your domain but none of the hassle of managing a server, you can get managed Matrix servers from different providers these days [0]. Just get your own domain like normal, so your address will always be your own property and you can take it somewhere else if you really need to, and point the domain records at the servers of your provider. If you do want to set up a server and join the Matrix network, there's an Ansible playbook [1] that'll set everything up on your server. You can also use the complete guide [2] if you want to manage everything manually. If you have any trouble getting federation to work, there's a nice diagnostic utility [3] that can help you identify the most common problems. Alternative client are coming along nicely now, as well. For the longest time, encryption support was missing from the major ones (with "solutions" like running a pantalaimon instance in the mean time), but e2ee support has been added to most clients now. The only fully-featured client without encryption support I've come across has been GNOME's Fractal. On mobile, Fluffychat [4] has been working well for me, and on desktop Element [5] has been working well, too. TL;DR: go to https://app.element.io/#/register https://app.element.io/#/register, pick a username, and give it a try in your browser. You can join a bunch of the bridged IRC servers to get a feel of the conversation flow if you have no contacts on Matrix. [0]: https://matrix.org/hosting/ https://matrix.org/hosting/ [1]: https://github.com/spantaleev/matrix-docker-ansible-deploy https://github.com/spantaleev/matrix-docker-ansible-deploy [2]: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/blob/master/INSTALL.md https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/blob/master/INSTALL.md [3]: https://federationtester.matrix.org/ https://federationtester.matrix.org/ [4]: https://fluffychat.im/en/ https://fluffychat.im/en/ [5]: https://element.io/get-started https://element.io/get-started
cmckn 6y ago
Eh, I don't think open source necessarily implies open development. Being able to look at and modify the source code of the software I use is the bar for "open source" for me; I don't expect every organization to do all their development out in the open. Seems like this code was made available while it was still relevant, so I don't think anyone is really at fault here.
- corty 6y ago
  For security software like Signal it does. When there is a lag in publishing server source code, the running version isn't what the public can inspect, but an old one that is no longer valid. And it produces the appearance that they have something to hide, like the need to sanitize the source and get rid of something. Maybe it is just embarrassing WIP stuff, maybe a backdoor.
  - fr2null 6y ago
    I don't think it does, at least not for the security reasons you name. If you are self-hosting a server, you may not have the latest and greatest features, but all the code you are running is open-source, so no sneaky backdoors (well, no more sneaky backdoors than the ones in the open source code). If you are not self hosting, than it really doesn't matter if the server source code is open or not. There is not a single guarantee that they are actually running the that code on their server. (For client code this is a different story of course, but we're talking about server source code)
    - corty 6y ago
      In a strict sense, you are completely right. But nonetheless people are recommending Signal because the client implementation looks good and is somewhat verifiable (absent appstore evilness and ignoring the lag between update and verification). The server implementation however is only based on trust in the people running the servers. And there, openness about the code at least gives a few hints about what is going on there, enabling me to trust at least a little more than not-at-all.
sim_card_map 6y ago
Signal creator is actively against 3rd party clients, because they "use his infrastructure for free": https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issuecomment-217211165 https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...
- stevenhuang 6y ago
  EDIT: inaccuracies, see below. Moxie is also using his position as the creator of Signal to promote and integrate his pet cryptocurrency project MobileCoin as a payment provider for Signal, of which he owns a majority stake in. Technical merits of MobileCoin aside, it's not a good look. Signal is really not inspiring confidence right now. EDIT: Sorry, Moxie is only serving as a paid technical advisor to MobileCoin--it is not his project and presumably does not own stake in MobileCoin. So that's better, but remains to be seen what enfolds. Found a summary of events here if anyone can confirm: 1. MobileCoin premines 250m coins 2. Moxie gets paid for being on their advisory board 3. Moxie directs his non-profit to integrate MobileCoin in secret 4. MobileCoin offers 1/5 of their premine for sale. 5. Signal announcement spikes price to $60 https://twitter.com/lrvick/status/1379536536459431937 https://twitter.com/lrvick/status/1379536536459431937
  - Klonoar 6y ago
    Can you provide a source for this...? The Wired article covering this has a note clarifying that both Moxie and Signal own no MobileCoins, and that he's been a paid advisor to the project. >Signal's choice of MobileCoin is no surprise for anyone watching the cryptocurrency's development since it launched in late 2017. Marlinspike has served as a paid technical adviser for the project since its inception, and he's worked with Goldbard to design MobileCoin's mechanics with a possible future integration into apps like Signal in mind. (Marlinspike notes, however, that neither he nor Signal own any MobileCoins.) https://www.wired.com/story/signal-mobilecoin-payments-messaging-cryptocurrency/ https://www.wired.com/story/signal-mobilecoin-payments-messa...
    - stevenhuang 6y ago
BugsJustFindMe 6y ago
> While communication is guaranteed to be secure due to the end-to-end encryption implemented in the open-source client apps and the Signal protocol So the client is open source and guarantees end-to-end encryption regardless of what the server does. Ok, then I honestly don't care. Why should I? I use Signal for its safety characteristics, which as stated are apparently ensured by the client regardless of what the server does, not because of the server, and I continue to agree with Moxie that federation is a white whale that doesn't solve any regular person problems.
- fossuser 6y ago
  I tend to agree with you - but keybase made a similar argument and then sold out their users to Zoom (with all of the concerns around the CCP's influence over Zoom). When that happens there isn't much recourse except to jump ship. I think this is unlikely with Signal since Brian Acton's $50M donation is contingent on them keeping inline with the mission (iirc) and also Moxie being involved is a good sign. Plus, realistically if the company gets ruined you're probably better of jumping ship anyway (as long as there's somewhere else to go - matrix? urbit?).
- DavidSJ 6y ago
  A few problems with this: 1) Much (most?) of the time, participants don't get to verify their safety numbers, and in those cases you are at least trusting the server to deliver your messages to the right client. There's a potential vector for man-in-the-middle attack (witting or unwitting) on the server side which shouldn't be dismissed here just because users are "supposed to" verify safety numbers. 2) Their behavior regarding server software might be predictive of their behavior regarding client software in the future. Given network effects, it might not be so easy to leave the Signal ecosystem in the future if your social network is on it, so it's worth knowing right now that it's possible that in the future the client software will also be closed-source.
  - FourthProtocol 6y ago
    "..trusting the server to deliver your messages to the right client." This is where I feel a little unsure about Signal. It wants access to my contacts, and so it is possible to poison my contacts to get a rogue recipient into Signal. I would like a Signal in which I have the option to manually add contacts. Ideally a hash or key exchange or something, maybe a la PGP...
krick 6y ago
(Whispering): But you know what is? Matrix.
makeworld 6y ago
Interestingly, this brand-new custom coin they're using is not Proof-of-Work or Proof-of-Stake. > The MobileCoin Consensus Protocol avoids the environmentally-damaging mathematical “work” required by Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus protocols like Bitcoin and realizes a much higher transaction rate than the Bitcoin consensus protocol. In contrast to Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus protocols, practical control of governance in MCP is ceded to the users who are trusted the most by the extended MobileCoin community, rather than to the wealthiest users who control the largest financial stakes. https://github.com/mobilecoinfoundation/mobilecoin/tree/master/consensus/service https://github.com/mobilecoinfoundation/mobilecoin/tree/mast...
- rapnie 6y ago
  So it is POT. Proof of Trust. If you break it, it is crackpot and goes up in smoke /s I am not familiar with this Quorums consensus mechanism, but in general I feel - especially given the scammy veil surrounding the entire field - that it is quite early to adopt such as-yet unproven technology in production software that is widely used by people where security and privacy (among others) is utterly important.
  - corty 6y ago
    They are using Byzantine Fault Tolerant Quorums. That is just a class of majority election algorithms that is tolerant to the presence of evil participants. But in short, it is just the majority of servers allowed to vote, so either proof of stake or a cartel. What they neglected to specify is the difference there: "who is allowed to vote?"
karussell 6y ago
They finally pushed the code out: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commits/master https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commits/master From an open source perspective Signal-Server is still not open and never was: No outside contributions and no public issues. No community. No installation documentation. etc. ... and recently they seem to have added a dependency to DynamoDB: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/0dcb4b645c9fc30368f75344627b943744275b62 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/0dcb4b645c... (2 weeks after they were overloaded from user registrations)
dang 6y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26345937 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26345937
- Klonoar 6y ago
  Can I ask why this is flagged as a duplicate? The comment threads in here feel substantially different than what was being discussed in that older thread linked there.
- throwitaway12 6y ago
  This is for sure not a duplicate and should be restored to it's rightful spot. Edit: Also, you cannot post on the other link for some reason?
  - pvg 6y ago
    The significant new thing in this story is on the front page already: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26713827 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26713827 The rest is a dupe-by-value, which is how dupuolity works on HN.
  - dang 6y ago
    There were so many Signal threads yesterday that it was hard to sort out which were technically dupes vs not. When they all overlap into the same discussion, they're all morally dupes anyhow. There's another active thread today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26725915 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26725915
- gojomo 6y ago
  That the repo was still without current code, another month later, was certainly interesting & novel to lots of people - especially given the 3x upvotes compared to the older story! But also: now that the linked page has been updated to reflect that Signal has pushed a newer version of source, it's fresh news again, under its current headline. (If it was, by chance, attention to this 'old news' that prompted Signal's update, that also suggests it was more than a simple 'dupe' in significance.)
stevespang 6y ago
The US Gov't forced a backdoor on Signal.
throwitaway12 6y ago
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Only children trust Signal. A "private" messenger that only works by attaching to your phone number. Another nail in the coffin. Edit: Look at that, negative points on my post that fast. We sure do have TLA's in here screening every single comment, while ensuring that this thread stays out of the front page. Guys, give it up already. No one with a bit of intelligence falls for your "app-traps"

242 points by raybb 6y ago

zaik 6y ago

A good opportunity to switch to a decentralised protocol like XMPP where no single entity can control the client and server you have to use to participate in the network.

ndiscussion 6y ago

It's been like this for a while, and the project owner's attitude is pretty negative overall. I do use signal daily, but I believe it's likely compromised ala lavabit.

morelisp 6y ago
What's in the Signal server to be compromised?
- corty 6y ago
  List of phone numbers? Pairs of communication partners? Timing and size of messages? Metadata about transferred media? There is still a lot, sufficient for targeting a drone strike as the usual wisdom goes.
  - tptacek 6y ago
    Some of that information you don't even need a backdoor to collect; the rest is stored in plaintext by Signal's competitors.
    - corty 6y ago
      Signal claims to specially protect some of that data, such claims need verification. Storing or not storing that data needs verification, without the trust that they do what they say they are no better than their competition. Trust is earned e.g. by openness about the source code. And that a server backdoor isn't strictly necessary is also beside the point because the server is the easiest and most obvious way to get at all that data. Also, there is competition like Briar which has less of those pesky metadata problems (but some other problems instead)
      - tptacek 6y ago
        I don't recall Signal ever having made implausible claims about traffic analytic attacks. I also don't buy into the idea that platforms are as trustworthy as their source release policies are orthodox.
        corty 6y ago
        It isn't advanced difficult traffic analysis if it is all your servers. Or all your logs landing in one logstash.
        tptacek 6y ago
        What difference does this make? In your threat model the only serious countermeasure between you and state-level adversaries is a Logstash implementation?
        morelisp 6y ago
        The goalposts now seem to be at "someone might subpoena Signal's logs for some metadata", having moved pretty far from the original claim of "Signal's server code hasn't been updated because it has been secretly backdoored or intentionally weakened." It's difficult to see this as good faith security analysis rather than fearmongering.
  - ViViDboarder 6y ago
    Signal doesn’t store lists of phone governments have lists of phone numbers. Comunication partners are hidden from the server using Sealed Sender for many conversations. The rest of this could possibly be obtained, it it wouldn’t require a patch to the server as message sizes and timestamps likely appear on disk somewhere. Though the data is encrypted, you could tell “x received a message from some party (sealed sender prevents knowing who) at y time of roughly z size”.
    - corty 6y ago
      Signal still uses and verifies phone numbers, so at some point they will pass through their infrastructure. They could still save them, knowing the source code they use gives at least at hint that they don't. Sealed sender also is based on the pinky-swear that the infrastructure distributing the sender auth certificates doesn't correlate identities and connections with the messaging infrastructure. And that the server receiving the enveloped messages doesn't log. So all based on trust based on believing the right source code is running somewhere. When access to that source code is restricted suddenly, of course people are worried.
  - pvarangot 6y ago
    Being able to hide from a government that wants to drone you while still being in the cellphone network requires much much much more OPSEC than just using Signal. For an average user Signal is about protecting the content of your messages, not your network, and it's good at that.
    - corty 6y ago
      Yes, that "drone strike" thing is actually a stupid saying. I'm sorry to have used it because it is somewhat distracting from the actual points.
- ndiscussion 6y ago
  If you use the Signal app from the app stores, and communicate with the server, you are using 100% closed source software. They could easily add a backdoor in the client despite the fact that it's "open source", because no one builds it from source.
  - morelisp 6y ago
    Are Signal's Android builds no longer reproducible?
    - ndiscussion 6y ago
      It looks like they are, but there might be a minor issue in verifying the content: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/10476 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/10476 But despite best efforts by the community to verify builds, Google and Apple can be forced to upload a malicious app to a particular user, meaning they aren't using the same app at all.
      - morelisp 6y ago
        If your threat model includes the ability to force Apple to do X, then Signal is irrelevant.
        ndiscussion 6y ago
        That's probably a good point, I'm using GrapheneOS which is not identifiable to Google/Apple and can't be singled out for updates.
      - greysonp 6y ago
        > But despite best efforts by the community to verify builds, Google and Apple can be forced to upload a malicious app to a particular user, meaning they aren't using the same app at all. Hi there! Signal-Android developer here. App signing verification is done at the OS-level, and Google does not have our signing key, so they wouldn't be able to give an existing user a different APK and have it successfully install.
gruez 6y ago
I thought they were never compromised? They shut down rather than comply with the order >The service suspended its operations on August 8, 2013 after the U.S. Federal Government ordered it to turn over its Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) private keys, in order to allow the government to spy on Edward Snowden's email
- ndiscussion 6y ago
  Lavabit was never compromised, I'm saying that Signal may have been compromised by the feds, instead of choosing to shut down. Feds may have learned their lesson and not provided an option this time.
  - notjtrig 6y ago
    The chance that a small nonprofit with so much traffic is not leaking/providing data to the feds is astronomically slim imho, there are so many actors who would love to there hands on it. Maybe it thwarts some inteligance services but not those with unlimited resources.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
      Based on what information would you draw such a conclusion?
      - notjtrig 6y ago
        I would point you towards Stuxnet and take a look at how sofisticated a state level attack can be and the fact that today Iran still can not keep us (America/Israel) out of it's centrifuges. Everything you type online is being stored by multiple actors, to think they can't access a small company with limited resources is wishful thinking. If no one in Signal's 180 employees is working for the feds I would be embarrassed to be an American.
coolspot 6y ago
Add easily-bruteforceable PIN-codes forced on users, protected only by vulnerable Intel SGX. Add requirement of a phone number to create an account.
rOOb85 6y ago
That's a bold claim with 0 data to back that up. What are your sources for believing it's received a love letter?

rvz 6y ago

> While it regularly publishes the code of its client apps, it hasn't updated the Github repository for its server for almost a year. Last commit was 5 days ago: [0] As for not playing nice with third-party clients, I can give you that point. [0] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/365ad3a4f821a9e2393c5a3e1522b2c03b9dfe40 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/365ad3a4f8...

RL_Quine 6y ago
This is a change that's very recent, perhaps even in response to this article in particular. https://web.archive.org/web/20210311053716/https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server https://web.archive.org/web/20210311053716/https://github.co... As of earlier this month, the repository was a year out of date.
- rvz 6y ago
  True, but the author of the blog post posted this '1 hour ago' (As of my comment) and maybe should have at least triple-checked the signal-server repository again rather than linking to a now outdated discussion thread on Signal-Android [0]. [0] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/11101#issuecomment-798900367 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/11101#iss...
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    If you read that thread, it's very possible the change happened in that hour. It seems to have been at some point today. I think a member of the team made it public ~15 minutes ago if I'm reading correctly.
    - RL_Quine 6y ago
      Google Cache shows that as of Apr 6, 2021 00:16:05 GMT the source had not been updated since 2020, so it happened within the last 6 hours. https://i.imgur.com/r1Y0Wgz.png https://i.imgur.com/r1Y0Wgz.png http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=cache:https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?client=safari&r... Screenshot from twitter showing it not updated "2 hours ago", about 04:43 GMT. https://twitter.com/AnanasPizza2/status/1379474849974910980 https://twitter.com/AnanasPizza2/status/1379474849974910980

Chlorus 6y ago

Wasn't Apple's iMessage protocol supposed to be an open implementation too? Whatever happened to that?

kitsunesoba 6y ago
That was FaceTime that they intended to open source, and it was supposedly a patent troll that forced them to move FaceTime to a more centralized design (it was originally P2P) which in turn made open sourcing more problematic.
- smnrchrds 6y ago
  That was certainly the excuse. But it is trivial for Apple to buy any patent it needs. I believe the real reason is that FaceTime and iMessage hook people to Apple platform and discourage switching to another one.
  - peytn 6y ago
    Wouldn’t that encourage future lawsuits from other patent trolls?
  - viro 6y ago
    > trivial for Apple to buy any patent it needs. Yea ... umm thats not how reality works. Companies CAN refuse to sell or license a patent at a rate that is not absurd.
  - aeontech 6y ago
    The patent troll in the case got a 440M award… and Apple had to spend a bunch of engineering time throwing out the already-working p2p implementation and rebuilding a centralized version… and you’re suggesting that this was all a mere smoke screen?
    - smnrchrds 6y ago
      They have 200 billion dollars in cash. They could have bought out the troll if they wanted to.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

alexfromapex 6y ago

I feel like it’s a honey trap.

yellowyacht 6y ago
> I feel like it’s a honey trap That's a serious accusation you are 'feeling'. What evidence do you have?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- poochdog 6y ago
  Tbh, the burden of proof for such a thing lies with Signal.
- alexfromapex 6y ago
  Why put feeling in quotes? No need to be rude. I guess comments about feeling aren't allowed on HN.
  - yellowyacht 6y ago
    What was serious or negative about my response?
- BuildTheRobots 6y ago
  Not op, but for me personally the moment it stopped being possible to send an e2e encrypted text message it became suspect. I'm forced to register and to send all messages through their central server. It also seems to scan through my phone book and inform me who else is using signal, even if I've not had contact with them in years. I'm still convinced this is a massive provacy leak. If I check the magic number to verify the security of my encryption with a contact, there's only one number to verify, yet I can have any number of desktop clients attached which seem to be independently capable of decrypting messages with my phone offline. There's also no indication to the sender that their message has been sent to multiple devices or any obvious way of working out where its been seen. There's also been the historical reliance on google services, the holsitlity towards people running their own servers and on occasion general hostility towards devs and end users too. For something that started off as a way of sending p2p e2e encrypted textual communication over the lowest common demoninator protocol worldwide, it's come a long way. Being able to send animated cat gifs to a group is great, but it feels (especially with the server code so far behind and no real way of verifying thats actually what's running anyway) like we're getting further and further from simple & verifiable and more and more into trust us territory, and it seems right to treat that with some suspicion.

bilal4hmed 6y ago

It looks like they had been working on adding MobileCoin support server side https://signal.org/blog/help-us-test-payments-in-signal/ https://signal.org/blog/help-us-test-payments-in-signal/ . Just a few minutes ago the server code was updated. Im honestly not happy about this. Feels yucky

RL_Quine 6y ago
Yep the date matches perfectly, they hid the signal-server repository explicitly to keep their MobileCoin integration secret for a year. This is bad even for them.
- kryogen1c 6y ago
  > they hid how did they hide anything? do you know this code has been in production?
  - dogecoinbase 6y ago
    If this code was _not_ in production, they had known vulnerabilites: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c018d75774ce89f3207b18051c26fe7#comments https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c... There is no interpretation of these events that's a good look, especially for a platform focused on privacy.
    - kryogen1c 6y ago
      we're talking about the code released today.
      - dogecoinbase 6y ago
        All of the code was released today. Up until earlier today, the most recent public commit on the repo was https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c018d75774ce89f3207b18051c26fe7 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/3432529f9c... , the commit immediately prior to the previously unseen https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/95f0ce181631fef8b1fdb507b7ecf5b71291ff38 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/95f0ce1816... "Support for advertising payment addresses on profile"

chrisco255 6y ago

Just use Status: https://status.im/private-messenger/ https://status.im/private-messenger/ Mozilla Public License - E2E Encryption - P2P Messaging - Active community & git repo - Integrated Ethereum wallet for Web3 access

Phobophobia 6y ago
I wish. Status has even less adoption and dev support. If I have bugs on signal for MMS with my carrier, I presume any smaller niche messenger will be tougher to have loved ones adopt and will have even more bugs.
- michaelsbradley 6y ago
  Current numbers re: adoption were discussed in Status' most recent Town Hall: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98wsQe6hHHs&t=365s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98wsQe6hHHs&t=365s As for dev support: Status has teams of full-time devs working on various projects related to the mobile[1] and desktop[2] (beta) apps, as well projects that are related to the larger Ethereum ecosystem, e.g. nimbus-eth2[3]. Our teams aren't particularly large, but are working steadily to squash bugs and add/improve features. We also have teams dedicated to UX and design. [1] https://github.com/status-im/status-react https://github.com/status-im/status-react [2] https://github.com/status-im/status-desktop https://github.com/status-im/status-desktop [3] https://github.com/status-im/nimbus-eth2 https://github.com/status-im/nimbus-eth2
speedgoose 6y ago
The integrated ethereum wallet is a red flag for me.
- ubercow13 6y ago
  The messaging itself actually runs on the ethereum network.
  - michaelsbradley 6y ago

sschueller 6y ago

I have asked this before but without an answer. Has anyone been able to successfully do a verified build of a recent version of the Android client? I have not been able to get it to compile but have not spent much time trying to figure out why it doesn't want to compile.

greysonp 6y ago
Hi there! Signal-Android developer here. Are you following the steps listed in our repo[1]? The steps use the very same docker image we use to build our releases. [1] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/tree/master/reproducible-builds https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/tree/master/repr...
- hiq 6y ago
  You have a fix waiting as a PR for what could be OP's issue: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/pull/11134 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/pull/11134
- sschueller 6y ago
  Yes I did but it was more than 15 days ago. I will try again.

gentleman11 6y ago

What’s new with matrix? Honestly curious, I find federated systems a little confusing and would love an overview

jeroenhd 6y ago
Been using it for a while now, mostly through bridges. e2ee works pretty much seamlessly now, as does the entire federation thing. Cross-device verification is simple; manual fingerprint comparisons have been replaced by the simple emoji comparison screens also found in other apps. If you don't want to bother setting up a server (and power to you, because server maintenance is annoying) just register with any open Matrix server you deem reliable enough. The matrix.org one is (obviously) pretty popular. As an end user, the federation stuff is no different from your average email address; there's a domain you store your stuff on and send your stuff through, that server is part of your address. If you make an account with a service provider that goes down, your messages disappear, same thing as would happen if Gmail or iCloud would take their servers down. If you want the security of your domain but none of the hassle of managing a server, you can get managed Matrix servers from different providers these days [0]. Just get your own domain like normal, so your address will always be your own property and you can take it somewhere else if you really need to, and point the domain records at the servers of your provider. If you do want to set up a server and join the Matrix network, there's an Ansible playbook [1] that'll set everything up on your server. You can also use the complete guide [2] if you want to manage everything manually. If you have any trouble getting federation to work, there's a nice diagnostic utility [3] that can help you identify the most common problems. Alternative client are coming along nicely now, as well. For the longest time, encryption support was missing from the major ones (with "solutions" like running a pantalaimon instance in the mean time), but e2ee support has been added to most clients now. The only fully-featured client without encryption support I've come across has been GNOME's Fractal. On mobile, Fluffychat [4] has been working well for me, and on desktop Element [5] has been working well, too. TL;DR: go to https://app.element.io/#/register https://app.element.io/#/register, pick a username, and give it a try in your browser. You can join a bunch of the bridged IRC servers to get a feel of the conversation flow if you have no contacts on Matrix. [0]: https://matrix.org/hosting/ https://matrix.org/hosting/ [1]: https://github.com/spantaleev/matrix-docker-ansible-deploy https://github.com/spantaleev/matrix-docker-ansible-deploy [2]: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/blob/master/INSTALL.md https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/blob/master/INSTALL.md [3]: https://federationtester.matrix.org/ https://federationtester.matrix.org/ [4]: https://fluffychat.im/en/ https://fluffychat.im/en/ [5]: https://element.io/get-started https://element.io/get-started

cmckn 6y ago

Eh, I don't think open source necessarily implies open development. Being able to look at and modify the source code of the software I use is the bar for "open source" for me; I don't expect every organization to do all their development out in the open. Seems like this code was made available while it was still relevant, so I don't think anyone is really at fault here.

corty 6y ago
For security software like Signal it does. When there is a lag in publishing server source code, the running version isn't what the public can inspect, but an old one that is no longer valid. And it produces the appearance that they have something to hide, like the need to sanitize the source and get rid of something. Maybe it is just embarrassing WIP stuff, maybe a backdoor.
- fr2null 6y ago
  I don't think it does, at least not for the security reasons you name. If you are self-hosting a server, you may not have the latest and greatest features, but all the code you are running is open-source, so no sneaky backdoors (well, no more sneaky backdoors than the ones in the open source code). If you are not self hosting, than it really doesn't matter if the server source code is open or not. There is not a single guarantee that they are actually running the that code on their server. (For client code this is a different story of course, but we're talking about server source code)
  - corty 6y ago
    In a strict sense, you are completely right. But nonetheless people are recommending Signal because the client implementation looks good and is somewhat verifiable (absent appstore evilness and ignoring the lag between update and verification). The server implementation however is only based on trust in the people running the servers. And there, openness about the code at least gives a few hints about what is going on there, enabling me to trust at least a little more than not-at-all.

sim_card_map 6y ago

Signal creator is actively against 3rd party clients, because they "use his infrastructure for free": https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issuecomment-217211165 https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...

stevenhuang 6y ago
EDIT: inaccuracies, see below. Moxie is also using his position as the creator of Signal to promote and integrate his pet cryptocurrency project MobileCoin as a payment provider for Signal, of which he owns a majority stake in. Technical merits of MobileCoin aside, it's not a good look. Signal is really not inspiring confidence right now. EDIT: Sorry, Moxie is only serving as a paid technical advisor to MobileCoin--it is not his project and presumably does not own stake in MobileCoin. So that's better, but remains to be seen what enfolds. Found a summary of events here if anyone can confirm: 1. MobileCoin premines 250m coins 2. Moxie gets paid for being on their advisory board 3. Moxie directs his non-profit to integrate MobileCoin in secret 4. MobileCoin offers 1/5 of their premine for sale. 5. Signal announcement spikes price to $60 https://twitter.com/lrvick/status/1379536536459431937 https://twitter.com/lrvick/status/1379536536459431937
- Klonoar 6y ago
  Can you provide a source for this...? The Wired article covering this has a note clarifying that both Moxie and Signal own no MobileCoins, and that he's been a paid advisor to the project. >Signal's choice of MobileCoin is no surprise for anyone watching the cryptocurrency's development since it launched in late 2017. Marlinspike has served as a paid technical adviser for the project since its inception, and he's worked with Goldbard to design MobileCoin's mechanics with a possible future integration into apps like Signal in mind. (Marlinspike notes, however, that neither he nor Signal own any MobileCoins.) https://www.wired.com/story/signal-mobilecoin-payments-messaging-cryptocurrency/ https://www.wired.com/story/signal-mobilecoin-payments-messa...
  - stevenhuang 6y ago

BugsJustFindMe 6y ago

> While communication is guaranteed to be secure due to the end-to-end encryption implemented in the open-source client apps and the Signal protocol So the client is open source and guarantees end-to-end encryption regardless of what the server does. Ok, then I honestly don't care. Why should I? I use Signal for its safety characteristics, which as stated are apparently ensured by the client regardless of what the server does, not because of the server, and I continue to agree with Moxie that federation is a white whale that doesn't solve any regular person problems.

fossuser 6y ago
I tend to agree with you - but keybase made a similar argument and then sold out their users to Zoom (with all of the concerns around the CCP's influence over Zoom). When that happens there isn't much recourse except to jump ship. I think this is unlikely with Signal since Brian Acton's $50M donation is contingent on them keeping inline with the mission (iirc) and also Moxie being involved is a good sign. Plus, realistically if the company gets ruined you're probably better of jumping ship anyway (as long as there's somewhere else to go - matrix? urbit?).
DavidSJ 6y ago
A few problems with this: 1) Much (most?) of the time, participants don't get to verify their safety numbers, and in those cases you are at least trusting the server to deliver your messages to the right client. There's a potential vector for man-in-the-middle attack (witting or unwitting) on the server side which shouldn't be dismissed here just because users are "supposed to" verify safety numbers. 2) Their behavior regarding server software might be predictive of their behavior regarding client software in the future. Given network effects, it might not be so easy to leave the Signal ecosystem in the future if your social network is on it, so it's worth knowing right now that it's possible that in the future the client software will also be closed-source.
- FourthProtocol 6y ago
  "..trusting the server to deliver your messages to the right client." This is where I feel a little unsure about Signal. It wants access to my contacts, and so it is possible to poison my contacts to get a rogue recipient into Signal. I would like a Signal in which I have the option to manually add contacts. Ideally a hash or key exchange or something, maybe a la PGP...

krick 6y ago

(Whispering): But you know what is? Matrix.

makeworld 6y ago

Interestingly, this brand-new custom coin they're using is not Proof-of-Work or Proof-of-Stake. > The MobileCoin Consensus Protocol avoids the environmentally-damaging mathematical “work” required by Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus protocols like Bitcoin and realizes a much higher transaction rate than the Bitcoin consensus protocol. In contrast to Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus protocols, practical control of governance in MCP is ceded to the users who are trusted the most by the extended MobileCoin community, rather than to the wealthiest users who control the largest financial stakes. https://github.com/mobilecoinfoundation/mobilecoin/tree/master/consensus/service https://github.com/mobilecoinfoundation/mobilecoin/tree/mast...

rapnie 6y ago
So it is POT. Proof of Trust. If you break it, it is crackpot and goes up in smoke /s I am not familiar with this Quorums consensus mechanism, but in general I feel - especially given the scammy veil surrounding the entire field - that it is quite early to adopt such as-yet unproven technology in production software that is widely used by people where security and privacy (among others) is utterly important.
- corty 6y ago
  They are using Byzantine Fault Tolerant Quorums. That is just a class of majority election algorithms that is tolerant to the presence of evil participants. But in short, it is just the majority of servers allowed to vote, so either proof of stake or a cartel. What they neglected to specify is the difference there: "who is allowed to vote?"

karussell 6y ago

They finally pushed the code out: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commits/master https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commits/master From an open source perspective Signal-Server is still not open and never was: No outside contributions and no public issues. No community. No installation documentation. etc. ... and recently they seem to have added a dependency to DynamoDB: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/0dcb4b645c9fc30368f75344627b943744275b62 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/commit/0dcb4b645c... (2 weeks after they were overloaded from user registrations)

dang 6y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26345937 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26345937

Klonoar 6y ago
Can I ask why this is flagged as a duplicate? The comment threads in here feel substantially different than what was being discussed in that older thread linked there.
throwitaway12 6y ago
This is for sure not a duplicate and should be restored to it's rightful spot. Edit: Also, you cannot post on the other link for some reason?
- pvg 6y ago
  The significant new thing in this story is on the front page already: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26713827 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26713827 The rest is a dupe-by-value, which is how dupuolity works on HN.
- dang 6y ago
  There were so many Signal threads yesterday that it was hard to sort out which were technically dupes vs not. When they all overlap into the same discussion, they're all morally dupes anyhow. There's another active thread today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26725915 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26725915
gojomo 6y ago
That the repo was still without current code, another month later, was certainly interesting & novel to lots of people - especially given the 3x upvotes compared to the older story! But also: now that the linked page has been updated to reflect that Signal has pushed a newer version of source, it's fresh news again, under its current headline. (If it was, by chance, attention to this 'old news' that prompted Signal's update, that also suggests it was more than a simple 'dupe' in significance.)

stevespang 6y ago

The US Gov't forced a backdoor on Signal.

throwitaway12 6y ago

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Only children trust Signal. A "private" messenger that only works by attaching to your phone number. Another nail in the coffin. Edit: Look at that, negative points on my post that fast. We sure do have TLA's in here screening every single comment, while ensuring that this thread stays out of the front page. Guys, give it up already. No one with a bit of intelligence falls for your "app-traps"