8 ms·
Reminder that Signal server source code is not fully released and the app is heavily dependent on google services to operate. Signal also takes measures agains
by dfkajglag 5y ago
Reminder that Signal server source code is not fully released and the app is heavily dependent on google services to operate. Signal also takes measures against third party or unofficial apps.
Whatever you say about privacy Signal is not an ally of user freedom.
- toomuchtodo 5y agoThese are not requirements for most messaging app users. I just want secure messaging. I don’t care if it’s open or interoperable. WhatsApp if it was run by a non profit.
- iqanq 5y agoThat's why I simply use whatsapp.
- nicce 5y agoTechnically it is not very secure. It leaks the most interesting stuff (metadata). People think that only message content matters.
- 323 5y agoWhat metadata is it leaking? Any link?
- nicce 5y agoEverything they can possibly get with the app. Only message content is E2EE. https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/privacy-policy https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/privacy-policy https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/end-to-end-encryption https://faq.whatsapp.com/general/security-and-privacy/end-to...
- gefhfffh 5y agoDidn't know leaking meta data was a requirement for most of the people ;-)
- nicce 5y agoThe most people don’t understand their own requirements. For example before Apple’s privacy features, Facebook (Meta) could try to guess the message contents with certain probablity based on other app usage. (Facebook trackers on different apps and cross-app tracking)
- gefhfffh 5y agoWhat is exactly what I am trying to say, since the comment up the chain states that e.g. interoperability isnt a requirement of most users
- Freak_NL 5y agoMost messaging app users don't really care about encryption either. Most (or at least a large minority) probably wouldn't mind if their messages were used to 'deliver ads more suitable for you'. It doesn't mean these aren't important issues. Until Signal drops the phone number requirement (nothing beats that for efficient user tracking), allows desktop use without requiring a smartphone anywhere in the process, open sources their server code, and allows for third party clients in a reasonable way; I agree with dfkajglag: not yet an ally of user freedom.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Semaphor 5y ago> Until Signal drops the phone number requirement (nothing beats that for efficient user tracking), allows desktop use without requiring a smartphone anywhere in the process I could handle the closed server for enabling me to use IM to talk to people. But these two points are what make it a non-starter for me.
- lucian1900 5y agoThe phone number requirement is the only thing making Signal remotely close to usable for the wider public. Similarly, non-phone messaging is niche in the extreme. Unusable software is not an ally of user freedom. The actual problem with Signal is that they took US State Department funding. That doesn't mean it's an op necessarily, but suspicious nonetheless.
- Freak_NL 5y agoWhy? If someone wants to use a phone number for their identifier, fine. But make it optional. If I join Signal with another alias (free-form string perhaps) then they could just add me via that. Not really harder than using my phone number.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> Why? If someone wants to use a phone number for their identifier, fine. But make it optional Network effects. If you’re only findable via custom handle versus the phone number your network already has, you’ve reduced the network’s value to your contacts. Put another way, if I join a messaging service and it says two of my contacts are on it (but many more may be), that’s close to a non-starter.
- gefhfffh 5y agoEven if it's not most users, it still benefits the other people. Why should everyone be forced to give away their phone number? Why should everyone be forced to use the same app including it's limitations? Why should everyone be forced to make a contract with the same vendor? It could well be that it's not a requirement, because people don't think about it or take it as given. Imagine Email or phones would work the same way Signal works (with respect to the above concepts). Is non profit a requirement for most messaging app users?
- toomuchtodo 5y agoYou are free to not use the product if it and it's roadmap doesn't meet your needs. Lots of messaging options to choose from.
- gefhfffh 5y agoUnfortunately, you can't simply choose. Messaging apps that don't interoperate inherently create forces to use their app if you have contacts you want to reach on that app
- gefhfffh 5y ago"One in four people struggle to keep up with friends because they are using too many apps" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10451559/One-four-people-struggle-friends-using-apps.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10451559/One... TLDR: people are just not aware of their requirements
- pedroaraujo 5y agoNot to mention that they keep investing in things that people don't necessarily care about (like the crypto currency embedded in the app). It is kind of beyond me why people would submit to monthly donations to a company which only care about its own interests.
- JeremyNT 5y agoI had actually considered donating to Signal, but the addition of Moxie's crypto scheme to the app scared me completely away. Signal kind of hits a sweet spot of usability and security, but it's incredibly tenuous and I don't trust the company to hold my interests at heart. It seems like we should be able to do better.
- tapoxi 5y agoWhat do you mean 'not fully released'? It's here: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server
- fao_ 5y agoIs that the version that is actually deployed to their servers, though?
- fastball 5y agoIs that possible for Signal to prove in a meaningful way?
- ryeights 5y agoIntel SGX? They are already using it for some portion of the server code.
- lkxijlewlf 5y agoWhy wouldn't it be?
- speedgoose 5y agoBackdoors.
- kitkat_new 5y agobecause https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/qlw1ag/signal_is_adding_a_closedsource_spam_reduction/ https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/qlw1ag/signal_is_a...
- Klonoar 5y agoSurely you could link to the actual blog pose rather than a subreddit that regularly crosses the border into conspiracy theory territory.
- NeutronStar 5y ago
- franga2000 5y ago> Whatever you say about privacy Signal is not an ally of user freedom. Good reminder for those that don't know, but did anyone ever claim otherwise? From the very start, releasing the source code was meant exclusively as a way to ensure trust == security. It was never about software freedom - the only freedom the devs mentioned was freedom of speech (encryption and censorship-resistence).
- gherkinnn 5y agoMy grandparents can all set it up without me flying over to do it for them. Concessions have to be made somewhere.
- binkHN 5y agoI’m tired of all these text messaging silos. Email is ubiquitous because no one owns it. RCS can’t come fast enough.
- barbazoo 5y agoI'll bite. What's RCS?
- ryeights 5y agoThe “next-generation” text messaging standard to replace SMS/MMS. Higher quality images, read receipts, etc. I believe it also supports some form of encryption.
- barbazoo 5y agoInteresting, I'm surprised to find Google as a big promoter of this, doesn't this go against their walled garden approach if there is a universal messaging infrastructure?
- binkHN 5y agoGoogle is its biggest backer and you can find more at https://jibe.google.com https://jibe.google.com, along with the usual Internet searches.