4 ms·

I have met Moxie and followed his work for over a decade. He is one of the most ethical people in the information security industry. I would suggest people put

I have met Moxie and followed his work for over a decade. He is one of the most ethical people in the information security industry. I would suggest people put down their pitch forks and think this through carefully. I can’t imagine this was done lightly or without considering Signal’s core mission in a highly ethical context. There is a lot of anti-crypto sentiment these days. Does this announcement actually change the ethical or moral landscape for Signal, at all? Does it compromise Signals security as a messenger client?

sbarre 5y ago
I am willing to wait until the dust settles before passing judgement, but if the facts in the linked article - that the exchange backing this basically unknown currency is financially tied to Signal in some way - then it's hard to not see _potential_ conflicts of interest here, and be suspicious of the motivations involved. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... etc.. As for Moxie.. he has indeed done great work, but a lot of people, ethical or otherwise, get to a point in their life where they just want to get paid and move on. I'm not saying that's the case here, I have no insider info, but it has certainly happened before. All I hope is that this is an opt-in feature that you can easily ignore or disable, and it's not constantly being pushed on us and getting in the way of just sending messages.
skywhopper 5y ago
Unfortunately the fact that the code updates were hidden from GitHub while this feature was in development and the fact that the announcement doesn’t really address the risks argue against this being an ethical move.
gm3dmo 5y ago
I believe Moxie to be a person of integrity, therefore I'm happy to wait and see how this pans out.
dexen 5y ago
As a background I'm broadly pro-crypto, in particular the privacy-preserving coins. >He is one of the most ethical people in the information security industry. Connecting your communications history, your transaction history and your offline ID through phone number is an explicitly pro-establishment move. Something must have changed along the way about his originally cypherpunk positions. >Does it compromise Signals security as a messenger client? Not that we know. The problem is much more pernicious: through centralization, it makes the user less secure. In case of a privacy breach or court ordered document reveal or seizure, the scope will be much broader: communication history AND transaction history. Given that it will also list the transaction counter-parties, this opens up others to the privacy risks just as well. The correct solution: decouple messaging from your offline identity (phone number etc.). Decouple transactions from offline identity and from communications - proper use of cryptocurrency is good for that.
PH01 5y ago
> He is one of the most ethical people in the information security industry. What does this statement actually mean? To my mind both cryptocurrency and cypherpunk culture have set some fairly low bars for ethical and moral conduct. There appears to be a bit of a pattern of idolisation in crypto and cypher areas. A developer who fits the media mould of the 1995 Hackers film is spotlighted as saving the world. The spotlight brings attention and drives a project forward. Eventually the spotlight reveals these people have the same motivations as most people. Onlookers are disappointed.

sbarre 5y ago

I am willing to wait until the dust settles before passing judgement, but if the facts in the linked article - that the exchange backing this basically unknown currency is financially tied to Signal in some way - then it's hard to not see _potential_ conflicts of interest here, and be suspicious of the motivations involved. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... etc.. As for Moxie.. he has indeed done great work, but a lot of people, ethical or otherwise, get to a point in their life where they just want to get paid and move on. I'm not saying that's the case here, I have no insider info, but it has certainly happened before. All I hope is that this is an opt-in feature that you can easily ignore or disable, and it's not constantly being pushed on us and getting in the way of just sending messages.

skywhopper 5y ago

Unfortunately the fact that the code updates were hidden from GitHub while this feature was in development and the fact that the announcement doesn’t really address the risks argue against this being an ethical move.

gm3dmo 5y ago

I believe Moxie to be a person of integrity, therefore I'm happy to wait and see how this pans out.

dexen 5y ago

As a background I'm broadly pro-crypto, in particular the privacy-preserving coins. >He is one of the most ethical people in the information security industry. Connecting your communications history, your transaction history and your offline ID through phone number is an explicitly pro-establishment move. Something must have changed along the way about his originally cypherpunk positions. >Does it compromise Signals security as a messenger client? Not that we know. The problem is much more pernicious: through centralization, it makes the user less secure. In case of a privacy breach or court ordered document reveal or seizure, the scope will be much broader: communication history AND transaction history. Given that it will also list the transaction counter-parties, this opens up others to the privacy risks just as well. The correct solution: decouple messaging from your offline identity (phone number etc.). Decouple transactions from offline identity and from communications - proper use of cryptocurrency is good for that.

PH01 5y ago

> He is one of the most ethical people in the information security industry. What does this statement actually mean? To my mind both cryptocurrency and cypherpunk culture have set some fairly low bars for ethical and moral conduct. There appears to be a bit of a pattern of idolisation in crypto and cypher areas. A developer who fits the media mould of the 1995 Hackers film is spotlighted as saving the world. The spotlight brings attention and drives a project forward. Eventually the spotlight reveals these people have the same motivations as most people. Onlookers are disappointed.