42 ms·

Signal says it won’t compromise on encryption

422 points by TobTobXX 4y ago

kornhole 4y ago
People act when on the precipice. Decentralized e2ee messengers and servers will thrive now in India: xmpp, matrix, session, tox, briar, Jami..
- uri4 4y ago
  Maybe not, imagine possession of such program is treated same way as a child pornography.
  - ls15 4y ago
    How popular would it be to treat people like pedos, just because of an app that they use?
    - wiseowise 4y ago
      Easy. Make everyone think that you have to hide something or create a fake stories that pedos use app X. > if you have nothing to hide, why don’t you show it? Is also “nice” rhetoric that laymen agree with.
      - ls15 4y ago
        I'd assume that India has its fair share of smart people who are able to spot fallacious rhetorics and want to see the bank accounts of officials in return.
        wiseowise 4y ago
        Smart people don’t dictate things, majority does.
        avidiax 4y ago
        Who is "smarter", the people that manipulate both their philosophy and the majority's opinion to suit their goals, or the people who's smart philosophies are uncompromised but unimplemented?
        wiseowise 4y ago
        You’ll have to consult the opinion of parent comment. I read it as smart=intellectually smart and virtuous.
        brahma-dev 4y ago
        India has such stuff: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/lok-sabha-passes-bill-to-exempt-political-parties-from-scrutiny-on-foreign-funds-without-debate/article23285764.ece https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/lok-sabha-passes-bill... https://indianexpress.com/article/business/banking-and-finance/electoral-bonds-parties-mop-up-over-rs-10000-crore-since-2018-8062883/ https://indianexpress.com/article/business/banking-and-finan...
    - yesbut 4y ago
      Probably not popular, but it would be really easy for the state to do it. All they need is their larger media outlets to make a few daytime TV story lines featuring these apps in their narratives, a couple big budget movies, some exaggerated "criminal activity" headlines in the major press. Next thing you know we get the next Satanic Scare.
    - soulofmischief 4y ago
      This rhetoric is already applied against onion websites and similar decentralized networks.
    - olliej 4y ago
      No, what the government says is "use of X is sufficient evidence to support a warrant", then the fact the everyone does it is irrelevant - you only use it against enemies so that's the only time it comes up. Because this is likely government triggered invasion of privacy, it's easy to see how a government can then make it appear that a given [ab]use of the law be "legit". In CA for example the standard highway speed limit is 65mph, but everyone drives well over 70 (this isn't a silly "everyone does it", it's a "if you're doing 65 you may well be rear ended"), this means that the CHP can basically choose whoever they want to pull over, despite everyone breaking the same laws. Essentially they've created a system where everyone is breaking a law so that they can then selectively charge.
    - dangerface 4y ago
      The average person uses whatsapp, has no idea about security, has never heard of signal. The media will tell them signal is specifically setup up to prevent law enforcement. They will give an example of a drug dealer that gets caught and has the app on their phone. Even if the dealer didn't use signal for dealing the connection is presented. The average person will connect the dots. Signal is an underground app for illegal stuff. I have nothing to hide so I don't need Signal to exist. People must use signal for the most illegal and disturbing thing I can think of. Signal users must be pedos. Signal must be banned. This is how power uses media to control the masses. They don't need to make the claim they simply present facts in a narrative and allow the average person to connect the dots making them feel like they figured it all out themselves.
- jorvi 4y ago
  Or they’ll just install the .apk directly? iPhone users are screwed until sideloading becomes a thing, but iPhones represent a tiny market share in India, AFAIK
  - black3r 4y ago
    Sideloading on iPhones is already possible, but requires a Mac/PC and is limited for people without paid developer account (max. 3 apps, must reinstall every 7 days, there are windows/mac apps which do it for you automatically). with paid developer account you can sideload unlimited apps and they last a year... If you're interested, check out AltStore, or Sideloadly...
yieldcrv 4y ago
> If India passes a law or deems Signal to not be in compliance with whatever encryption regulation, will you walk? Makes me think of my encounters with US encryption export regulations. I think we're all lucky those aren't enforced.
sneak 4y ago
Reminder that Apple did this domestically for the FBI/iMessage. They intentionally maintain a backdoor in the end to end crypto of iMessage: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive/exclusive-apple-dropped-plan-for-encrypting-backups-after-fbi-complained-sources-idUSKBN1ZK1CT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...
- olliej 4y ago
  This is incorrect. iMessage is encrypted, the encryption is end-to-end, there are no backdoors. The unencrypted backup is a clear and annoying hole in the apple privacy story, but the non-e2ee iCloud backup does not include any messages (SMS, MMS, or iMessage), Contacts, Calendars, Notes, iCloud Photos, or health data. A local backup is local, and is protected by filesystem encryption on your local storage. So no, iMessage has no backdoors. Basic research would have showed that this claim was bogus.
  - alwayslikethis 4y ago
    If my iPhone got run over by a truck, and I log in my apple ID to another iPhone, will I get my messages back?
    - alxmng 4y ago
      Nope, unless you’re using iCloud backup, or your messages can be synced from other devices in the key ring.
      - jorvi 4y ago
        Via that same logic Telegram has ironclad E2E encryption ‘because secret chats’. 99% of people have iCloud backups turned on.
      - olliej 4y ago
        No this is the whole point: if you are using iCloud backups, your messages are not backed up. The _only_ online way to maintain your iMessages is (checks settings) "Messages in the Cloud", which is e2e encrypted - if you lose all your devices there is no recovery path except for the "iCloud Key Vault", but I honestly don't know if that can get you to a point where old messages can be recovered.
a-user-you-like 4y ago
Is there anything more secure than signal that is widely used? Maybe something that doesn’t leak metadata or require a phone number?
- ycuser2 4y ago
  Threema, but it's not free.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
  matrix
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    I have been wondering how censorship resistant matrix is. As far as I know, groups are not hosted on any particular server, it’s some kind of shared consensus. I suppose the moderators would still be at risk of hosting platforms and ISPs dropping their homeserver.
  - betwixthewires 4y ago
    Matrix is great, but it leaks a ton of data.
    - fsflover 4y ago
      To whom? AFAIK if you self-host, no data is leaked.
      - rakoo 4y ago
        If you and everyone you talk to are hosted on servers you trust, down to the physical provider, yes. EDIT: if the person you're talking to is hosted on Google, Google has all the metadata. Even if one person is hosted on Google and is part of a room you're in, Google has all the metadata in that room. In 2022 e2ee is the standard for messages but not metadata, and unfortunately Matrix doesn't tackle it, so no, you can't expect 100% privacy.
UberFly 4y ago
Requiring handing over encryption keys as a requirement to do business there sounds like a good way to sanction yourself from the modern world.
- checkyoursudo 4y ago
  As much as I agree with you according to my own principles, I would not underestimate the sacrifice-anything-for-profits side of the cost-benefit analysis that many businesses will perform.
  - als0 4y ago
    Signal is a nonprofit though. They shouldn't be under pressure to create business.
    - sschueller 4y ago
      Non profit but still against federation or anyone running an alternative client. Why?
      - 411111111111111 4y ago
        It's a non profit so it can receive donations, but the developer is a LLC that's run for profit. It's a similar story in almost all software companies that market themselves as non-profit foundations (Mozilla too btw) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation#Signal_Messenger_LLC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation#Signal_Mes...
        Vinnl 4y ago
        The effect is the same as it is for "regular" non-profits: there are no shareholders (other than the non-profit), and so no incentives to maximise profits. (Of course employees and board members can still receive handsome compensation, but the same holds true for regular non-profits.)
        4y ago
shauryamanu 4y ago
Why doesn't govt improve its own machinery instead of trying to spy on its citizens? Do they think this way they'll improve the society? Like China?
- _5uxp 4y ago
  all about power
- DocTomoe 4y ago
  The first function of a state is to ensure the continued existence of the state. Which is threatened a lot more by civil uprisings as compared to an external actor, especially in a time when international relations are relatively stable (current security events being the formerly-normal that is today's extreme). Another "storm on the Capitol" is so much more damaging to the US as it exists today as compared to a border skirmish with the Chinese over Taiwan.
  - FortiDude 4y ago
    The state wouldn't fear civil uprising if it made its citizens' lives half decent
    - DocTomoe 4y ago
      Then it would take away from other powerful factions, which will then ... overthrow the state. The idea of an unified, altruistic populus which will put the average wellbeing over their own is utopian - in both senses of the word. Reading suggestion: The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics, by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith
- beebeepka 4y ago
  Tell me which country doesn't spy on its citizens.
JohnJamesRambo 4y ago
Proud of Signal’s stance on this!
alxmng 4y ago
How is Signal tied to the region? What does it mean to “exit” India, exactly?
- throwaway4good 4y ago
  App store, dns, routable ip-address.
- NavinF 4y ago
  It means they'll get banned from the app stores and have their server IPs blackholed.
  - avidiax 4y ago
    This is one of the pro/cons of trusting a messaging service from one of the big internet players. Sure Google/Facebook are profit-seeking enterprises, and won't put everything on the line for a privacy promise. However neither of those companies is terribly easy to just blackhole. You can blackhole some IPs, but you'll also be causing your own business and government endless technical headaches since those IPs also serve local ads, shared folders and documents, government outreach channels, cloud services, etc.
2Gkashmiri 4y ago
eh. good riddance. unless they move away from mobile number requirement, they are as bad as telegram or whatsapp as the local police has been known to phish for phone numbers and physcailly harrass them and what not. https://thenextweb.com/news/kashmirs-police-want-people-to-register-their-whatsapp-groups https://thenextweb.com/news/kashmirs-police-want-people-to-r... https://kashmirobserver.net/2021/12/23/police-warns-social-media-users-in-kashmir-second-time-in-10-days/ https://kashmirobserver.net/2021/12/23/police-warns-social-m... https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/agra/in-up-district-register-with-government-to-run-a-whatsapp-group/articleshow/65616666.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/agra/in-up-district... https://theintercept.com/2020/12/06/kashmir-social-media-police/ https://theintercept.com/2020/12/06/kashmir-social-media-pol... this is for tweeting but twitter is a public platform, same as your "mobile number" because twitter forces 2fa that makes you put your mobile for "security" reasons. what i am trying to say is, this is not about police needing 100% access to find pedophiles. This is about crushing dissent, about the same big brother type are what people in india are seeing unless they join the ruling party. This is out in the open now and has for some time. This is the way of the government to force big players to comply. lets say tomorrow signal and whatsapp BOTH remove mobile number requirement. Now, unless the ISP are made to identify their specific traffic and block them on demand, ALL the users would be independent from local indian administrative action
willi59549879 4y ago
India wants to read everything? Why don't they just forbid the use of https. So that everyone can read everything on the internet
- antikneejerk 4y ago
  I read the linked source. Could not find any reference to any Indian law or Govt. order. Can you please point me to any source with credible information on the supposed provisions which are causing Signal to "exit" India.
  - dagmx 4y ago
    https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-to-intercept-encrypted-messages-on-whatsapp-signal-101663830524846.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-...
    - antikneejerk 4y ago
      Thanks. Again this article does not link to the supposed draft bill, and what it actually says. They directly jump to saying government wants to "intercept". How does the Govt propose to intercept? What was actually proposed in the bill? They also say the Govt. is seeking public feedback on the draft. Ideally this news source should link to the draft in question so that people can read, and raise their objections.
  - hummerbliss 4y ago
    Its was a proposed law (to solicit feedback). Signal is not exiting but would exit if such law comes to India. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-to-intercept-encrypted-messages-on-whatsapp-signal-101663830524846.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-... But Telecom Authority of India rules out any immediate intervention. https://tech.hindustantimes.com/tech/news/trai-rules-out-regulatory-intervention-for-ott-communication-services-71600134486496.html https://tech.hindustantimes.com/tech/news/trai-rules-out-reg... I couldn't quote from the article here but looks like they are going to wait till clarity emerges from International jurisdiction.
throwaway4good 4y ago
Tech companies will make all sort of noise when India, China, Turkey ask to have access and control over the data of their own people. However when NSA comes around with their secret laws and courts, they all bend the knee ...
- bobsmooth 4y ago
  That's because the NSA doesn't make big public statements. They just install a little black box in your servers and you don't say anything.
  - AshamedCaptain 4y ago
    That's because when the NSA comes knocking to your door you are also prevented from disclaiming the fact that the NSA came to visit. Unless you like the hospitality of prison, that is.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- password4321 4y ago
  Or go to jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio
baka367 4y ago
Is it me or India is becoming the next China?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jpgvm 4y ago
  People really have warped perceptions of different Asian nations. As someone that has been a resident of most of them they are mostly all like China... which shouldn't be surprising there is a lot of shared cultural history in the region and by and large they are more collectivist societies. Some are obviously worse (looking at you Myanmar) but most are various shades of authoritarian (Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, etc) and most have heavy censorship (yeah the same culprits again). This shouldn't surprise anyone and yet it always seems to.
  - FooBarWidget 4y ago
    This talk by professor Jeffrey Sachs at the Athens Democracy Forum couldn't be more timely. https://youtu.be/Ec2E4k1K52E https://youtu.be/Ec2E4k1K52E Different countries have long, deep-rooted political cultures that go back centuries. "Democracy vs authoritarianism" is the wrong lens: different systems are complex and cannot be ranked on an easy scale like we want them to.
    - oytis 4y ago
      It's not the wrong lens, it's a lens that authoritarian governments and their supporters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs#China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs#China) don't want people to use.
      - FooBarWidget 4y ago
        Interestingly, those push this sentiment the strongest, are also often those who deny others of having any sort of legitimate perspective, using methods that boil down to character assasination rather than argumentative refutation. It seems that such people want to monopolize on what constitutes the truth. That seems a bit... authoritarian to me?
dheerajvs 4y ago
> Some things are a bit Boolean, as Whittaker states above, but some things are simply binary. Eh, what's the difference? It's better to read the original article: https://www.theverge.com/23409716/signal-encryption-messaging-sms-meredith-whittaker-imessage-whatsapp-china https://www.theverge.com/23409716/signal-encryption-messagin...
- dang 4y ago
  Ok, we changed to that from https://www.techdirt.com/2022/10/26/signal-says-it-will-exit-india-rather-than-compromise-its-encryption/ https://www.techdirt.com/2022/10/26/signal-says-it-will-exit.... Thanks!
gandutraveler 4y ago
I do want to hear more about how signal and other companies are working to prevent their apps being used by bad actors, terrorists.
- polopo568866 4y ago
  I do want to hear more about how toll road management companies are working to prevent their roads being used by bad actors, terrorists. Food manufacturers should also ensure that they are not contributing to feeding bad actors... People like you being so easily manipulated by governments are extremely dangerous to democracy.
  - RadixDLT 4y ago
    hey, hey, hey Dont give these companies any ideas, chase bank already closes your account if you say something they dont like.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- lotqrpa 4y ago
  The greatest mystery to me is how anyone can think you can somehow stop 'bad actors' from communicating over the Internet other than banning it as a whole.
  - Anunayj 4y ago
    Exactly! "Oh no now I will have to use a illegal app to commit my illegal activities". Banning encryption doesn't stop bad actors from communicating over encryption, it just adds to the number of illegal things they did.
- beermonster 4y ago
  Next we would like to hear more about what owners of open spaces are doing allowing bad humans to use them to communicate sounding words over air.
- 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
hunglee2 4y ago
Big govt vs big tech, a battle that is being played out all over the world. Any country that value sovereignty and sees itself as an independent actor rather than a vassal state, must take the position India is taking, or else be susceptible to foreign owned apps influencing its citizenry. The only alternative would be to insist Signal hire its security agents into product / moderator roles, so that oversight can be conducted in more implicit ways. Not great for the users, but the world where globalised technology makes everyone friends is over
- pmalynin 4y ago
  I mean ok, but Signal is not big tech and provides orders of magnitude more positive value to society than say Facebook.
- kragen 4y ago
  > Big govt vs big tech Signal has 40 employees.
  - MichaelZuo 4y ago
    It does give the impression that the parent has no clue what their talking about.
- vasco 4y ago
  > be susceptible to foreign owned apps influencing its citizenry Are they banning all of the internet, books, movies and everything else too? Your position is that a state needs to control what the citizens can consume otherwise it's a vassal state? My country lived under dictatorship with hard censorship before, and reading your comment that was the vibes I got.
  - hunglee2 4y ago
    nothing is getting banned, governments are asking for access, which Signal is signalling it will refuse and withdraw service. India is a democracy, like the US, which makes similar requests for access for its domestic tech / media firms, as well demand the same for the few foreign owned ones which have had success in the country.
dheera 4y ago
How can they exit India if they never entered it? As long as they don't have a business entity there they can still keep running it, and it would be upto India to create a national firewall if they so wish to, otherwise their citizens would be able to still access Signal without any issues.
supermatt 4y ago
> WhatsApp does not protect metadata the way that Signal does. Signal knows nothing about who you are. This isn't strictly true though, no? Signal knows your mobile phone number. I appreciate that this is for facilitating usability, but its still a piece of metadata that can specifically be used to identify you - and signal knows it. You cant even use signal without verifying a mobile phone number AFAIK. They really shouldnt be making false statements like this. It undermines their (otherwise admirable) position.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- beermonster 4y ago
  I think this means, assuming it’s not a burner SIM bought with cash, that someone could “only” identify you were a signal user. They wouldn’t be able to see your social graph , who you contacted and when, from where, what was said, what groups you were in. I also thought I’d read on HN recently that they were looking at making this optional in the future but don’t quote me on that !
jb_007 4y ago
A noob question, how does signal know/prevent use of its app for illegal/criminal activities? Larger question here would be - Do governments and security agencies need to keep a tab on social media to check for illegal activities
- flipbrad 4y ago
  Illegal under which laws. Qatari law, which outlaws homosexuality? Russian law, which prohibits referring to the "invasion" of Ukraine? Or do you assume everyone around the world is subject to US law, so it's fine for all our messages to be intercepted and checked for compliance with US law?
- ilyt 4y ago
  > A noob question, how does signal know/prevent use of its app for illegal/criminal activities? If you allow for privacy you allow for illegal usage. There is no way around it. > Larger question here would be - Do governments and security agencies need to keep a tab on social media to check for illegal activities They can do it old fashioned way. Also every compromise on security can be used by bad actors as well, and in some cases government is that bad actor, even in 1st world countries.
- arynda 4y ago
  The same way a spoken language is a communication tool and doesn't restrict what is discussed.
- beermonster 4y ago
  This is answered in the article.
- pelario 4y ago
  What about phone companies ?
- sliken 4y ago
  How do roads prevent speeding, drug trafficing, human trafficing, fraud, etc?
UltraViolence 4y ago
Signal is too small a player and is therefore more likely to be bullied by governments. India is taking pot shots at it to see if it can get away with forcing them into intercepting communications. If they leave as a result, they'll simply shrug and move on. Also, I'm convinced that if Signal were to become popular they'd probably sell it to some commercial provider, since the cost of maintaining a service used by hundreds of millions if not billions is extremely expensive. WhatsApp is an entirely different matter. Hundreds of millions of Indians probably use it and if the company were to suspend service because the Indian government mandated a backdoor all hell would break loose! For the same reason both Australia and the UK haven't as of yet forced WhatsApp to install a backdoor, even though legislation forcing them to do so is already in place there.
- sroussey 4y ago
  How do you know that there is not a back door in WhatsApp?
  - jostyee 4y ago
    Presumption of innocence, or do you have seen any evidence to prove it exist, besides Durov's shit from time to time?
    - shiomiru 4y ago
      In the context of privacy, you can pretty much assume every black box is compromised. With Telegram this black box is the server (the client is open source); with WhatsApp, it's the client. I suppose there's threat models where WA still wins, but knowing it's owned by Meta, I have a hard time imagining what such a threat model would look like.
      - pseudo0 4y ago
        Is the Whatsapp client really a black box? APKs are fairly straightforward to decompile back to Smali or a reasonable approximation of Java, or people on rooted devices can hook it with Frida. Of course source code would be better, but it would be pretty brazen to stick a backdoor in an app store release. App versions for popular apps get archived by numerous third-party sites, so even a temporary backdoor in one specific version would be archived forever. That would be putting their reputation and billions of dollars on the line. Non-E2E with black box server code like Telegram is far more concerning, in my opinion. With a system like that, it would be trivial to backdoor and leave behind no evidence after the fact.
ThePowerOfFuet 4y ago
>“A big part of our model is telling people not to take our word for it.” That's rich, coming from a company that wasn't (and probably still isn't) running the code they made public. >So if I want to fork Signal and make my own, I can just take the code and do it today? >People do it. There are many of those. We don’t endorse them because we can’t guarantee or validate them — we don’t have the time or the resources for that. But yes, there are many out there. Sure, but you can't use them with the same server cluster everyone else in the world is using, making it about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
stevewatson301 4y ago
Whenever India and its authoritarian stances are mentioned, a number of folks (I presume Indians, both on HN and elsewhere) come out of the woodwork to sing praises of "national security" while saying nothing about how such power can be abused. It is truly sad to see that an entire populace can't see the perils of a government with broad-reaching powers, when government institutions jailing the opposition, censoring the press, and supressing minorities is rather commonplace there[1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_Muslims_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_Muslims_in_In...
- minraws 4y ago
  Well that's what we call power of propaganda, I say that as an Indian(still living in India). I honestly couldn't do anything even after writing letters, talking to friends who can talk to people who make shitty decisions, just cause there is no larger sentiment against these decisions, things just go by. And now I have to say I am not sure when will the general public understand this issue, or will they ever. Are we just too lazy to do anything about it, or too divided to put up a fight... Truly sad to see. Taking away rights to privacy is not the way of fighting the wrongs and problematic elements, and considering how corrupt our system can be I have no hope of it not being abused wildly. :(
  - minraws 4y ago
    Btw if anyone here is from Australia, you guys had a similar bill a few years ago correct? what happened after that? I am curious any hope of overturning this stuff from the sheer corporate backlash? Or, maybe I am too optimistic about people who sold their souls for money, making a stand.
    - SturgeonsLaw 4y ago
      Yeah, the Assistance and Access Act (2018) passed and is still the law of the land. It gave law enforcement, intelligence and the government the ability to compel Australian providers to backdoor their services. Can't tell you how often it's been invoked since it also allows for gag orders. Probably only 1 out of 10 Aussies would have even heard of it. The mainstream media here are about half a dozen ideologically aligned corporations who are not the type to ask hard questions, and the average Australian is focused only on their wealth, their family or their recreation.
cornel_io 4y ago
Meredith Whittaker was always an activist, and her being in charge of a big product doesn't change that, it just increases the risk. I don't believe for one second that if push comes to shove and she thinks it's an important cause she won't wield her power to cut through the supposed security of Signal and expose "undesirables" to the light of day and leak all their private info. I would not trust this product anymore, especially if you are not a hard leftist like her.
2-718-281-828 4y ago
Here's one major problem with Signal - you cannot delete contacts. Following scenario: 1) X communicates with Y using Signal trying to hide from Iranian police 2) Y is getting arrested and who ever is found to have his phone number is getting in to trouble as well 3) X deletes Y from its contacts 4) Y stays in X's contacts on Signal no matter what now what should X do? delete Signal? theoretically the police could reinstall it and see who you had in your contacts. There have been several issues opened for this problem on GitHub for years. They all get closed by their bot after couple of weeks. I have several ghost numbers and even ghost user names on my Signal clients. Super annoying and cluttering my list of contacts. For me Signal is just one option to avoid WhatsApp. But boy do I prefer Telegram ...
- dodgerdan 4y ago
  Usernames are under development right now so this will address this issue one way or another.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mlatu 4y ago
  it's either one pile of poo or another it seems... hosting your own matrix homeserver is probably not a thing you would like to do?
quitit 4y ago
Dear messaging services (Signal, Whatsapp, etc.) You don't get to say "hey our messaging service is more secure than x, y or z" That kind of statement can only be stated by external, independent researchers, not the marketing department. This thread alone has already pointed to a number safety/security issues that are neither obscure, unreasonable nor able to be addressed by the user. Additionally I wouldn't even describe Signal as the safest option available in comparison to the many E2EE widely available chat programs.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
mlatu 4y ago
fucking lying is what they do! how come, if they do not share data with third parties, that a "breakin" at TWILIO would have any consequence on signal? the app store claims data is not shared with 3rd parties, yet they use twilio to "verify phonenumbers" how about verifing them yourself? to expensive...? so twilio does it for free for you? what the fishy fuck is going on here? sure they do mention verifying the numbers with a third party in their terms & privacy policy, but the rest of their communication/advertising just very misleading and fishy, claiming they dont keep any data on you. i never liked or trusted signal, especially not with marlon"no federation for u"spike and not with auntie "i used to work for the FTC" either.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- maxwell 4y ago
  https://twilio.com/verify https://twilio.com/verify
  - mlatu 4y ago
    and? is it a free service? .. no it's not. what is your point?
nrvn 4y ago
Encryption is just a tip of the iceberg here. There are several major problems with Signal: - it is not that private after all since it requires a phone number. Yes, you can override this by using some virtual throwaway number if you are geeky enough but your account will be associated with this phone number anyways. - as a consequence you _will_ receive spam from bots fanning out messages to phone numbers. You can’t restrict your social circle to allow only chosen people or let’s say people only from your contact list to message you. - Signal protocol is probably great from the e2ee perspective but it is not federated and unlike XMPP you cannot spin up your own server and have full control over it. - Since the end product is not a protocol or a framework or a platform it is a product that is run by other people who you can only trust albeit you can verify and audit source code by yourself(or by hiring someone to do it on your behalf). And I am sure you cannot run an end-to-end audit of the whole Signal platform to verify that what they actually run has been built from the source code you have audited. - Since it is centralized, Signal is prone to censorship in those countries that decide to fight it. This leads to introducing workarounds like this https://signal.org/blog/run-a-proxy/ https://signal.org/blog/run-a-proxy/ to help people circumvent limitations in affected regions and territories.
- nicce 4y ago
  The solutions for the most of the issues you are describing comes with great usability costs. It is already hard to make non-tech people to switch from WhatsApp.
  - jakecopp 4y ago
    > The solutions for the most of the issues you are describing comes with great usability costs. What costs? Element (a popular Matrix client) has recently improved their onboarding greatly! https://element.io/blog/all-aboard-better-ftue-for-less-wtf/ https://element.io/blog/all-aboard-better-ftue-for-less-wtf/ It really is just as easy to onboard to Element as Signal these days, the UX has come a long way. And you'll never have the move them again, because you can choose any client you like.
    - 4y ago
c7DJTLrn 4y ago
Neither Signal, WhatsApp, or Telegram are particularly secure. On Signal for example, your private key is protected only by a verification text message and short PIN. That's very low entropy compared to a full ED25519 keypair. It's better than SMS but don't be fooled into thinking you have Snowden-level opsec because you use one of these apps. Use PGP and email.
- KAMSPioneer 4y ago
  > your private key is protected only by a verification text message and short PIN. That's very low entropy compared to a full ED25519 keypair. Can you explain what you mean by this? In practice, I can see the argument that the only verified identity (phone number) for most users is the one protected by a flimsy SMS verification message, but I don't believe that that implies your private key is terribly vulnerable to e.g. SIM swap attacks. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. Put another way: if you rigidly adhere to out-of-band-verified pubkeys for contacts, you should be fairly safe. True that Signal's UI makes this hard to do, but that's a different conversation than "your keys are only protected by SMS verification".
  - tialaramex 4y ago
    > True that Signal's UI makes this hard to do Do you think so? The app provides a "Safety Number" and QR code with built-in scanner to verify that yup, your device and their device have nobody in the middle. It has a visible reminder that you checked this person's actual identity (if you did) and a message appears if the keys change. If you are "rigidly adhering" to protocol your response should be to arrange an in-person meet-up to reconfirm, not "New phone? Cool".
    - KAMSPioneer 4y ago
      I agree that verification is easy. I think they have softened the warnings and behavior surrounding key changes to accommodate their users that have virtually no understanding of crypto (i.e. the majority of people). It's an understandable position for them to take, but yes, in my opinion the alarm bells when a key unexpectedly changes are more oriented towards casual users than a (to paraphrase c7DJTLrn) Snowden-level user. For the latter, I expect behavior more similar to an OpenSSH key mismatch (which is quite a bit more strongly worded than Signal's).
NayamAmarshe 4y ago
In reality, none of the popular apps that advertise themselves as a forefront of Privacy are safe. Decentralized protocols are the only viable alternatives to 'normie' chat apps like Telegram & Signal. Speek! is a new app that looks promising: https://speek.network/ https://speek.network/
veronikamartin 4y ago
[flagged]
fedeb95 4y ago
"Says"
iLoveOncall 4y ago
I mean this is not a surprising announcement given that encryption is their only selling point over competitors.
SnowHill9902 4y ago
Couldn’t one just do PGP over WhatsApp, over Telegram or whatever? Instead of sending a plaintext message you’d send the PGP message but using existing infrastructure. Then there’d only be metadata to harvest but content should definitely be secure.
- nousermane 4y ago
  [OTR] would probably be a goto for encrypting instant messages. But both that & PGP require a 3rd-party client (pidgin/adium/etc...), if user wants to retain at least some usability. And nowadays, every popular IM network wants 3rd-party clients off their net at all costs. Signal is on the better side of the spectrum here. While they explicitly say they don't support non-official clients connecting to the official network, this isn't rigorously enforced. WA, on the other hand, would permaban your whole account if you even so much as try to use 3rd-party client. [] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging
- jvolkman 4y ago
  Android's Messages app does this. RCS isn't end-to-end encrypted, but Messages adds the Signal protocol on top. https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf
O__________O 4y ago
I have nothing against Signal, Moxie, etc — but it attracts high-value targets. As such, Signal is an extremely high-value target. >> Signal knows nothing about who you are. This is based on trust, not systematic proofs, Signal knows this, yet never tells its users. For example, Signal uses Intel’s Software Guard Extensions (SGX) - which is know to have multiple attacks, any of which Signal might be forced to run using national security letter. They have also had multiple data breaches, which I am guessing average user is not aware of. Moxie is still on the board, and he personally refused multiple times to remove the requirement for a phone number. Lastly, Signals three board members have all been the leader of Signal in last year and I have been unable to find their most recent 990 non-profit disclosure.
- password4321 4y ago
  Signal does marketing by omission: "Intel’s SGX protects against introspection", "we depend on donations from our community", etc.
  - O__________O 4y ago
    Would it be possible for you to expand on Signal not being dependent on donations?
    - adamch 4y ago
      They also received a very large amount of funding from some successful tech founders, Brian Acton and Pavel Durov
      - O__________O 4y ago
        My understanding was that the funds from Brian Acton were a loan to be repaid, though might be wrong. I was unable to quickly locate any information relate to Pavel Durov having any financial relationship with Signal.
    - password4321 4y ago
faitswulff 4y ago
> Signal makes its code open-source. Is anyone aware of whether they are still obscuring spam related code? For the downvoters: - 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... - https://signal.org/blog/keeping-spam-off-signal/ https://signal.org/blog/keeping-spam-off-signal/
- rosnd 4y ago
  Okay, but so what? Why is this a problem? You can run a functional signal server without their spam filtering code.
  - faitswulff 4y ago
    It's a matter of trust. If I can't trust that it's truly open source, then it erodes some of the confidence I have in them. I haven't personally tried running a functional Signal server without the spam filtering code, so I don't know if it truly works without it.
osigurdson 4y ago
For now…
lizardactivist 4y ago
Signal is already compromised. I don't understand why people still keep fooling themselves it's private and secure. It requires a mobile number, and thus your identity is known and your device is uniquely identifiable anyway, and it's also developed in the US where three-letter agencies have infinite reach and control.
- sliken 4y ago
  Yes, your signal identity is tied to a phone number. But attackers can't tell who you are talking to, or what groups you are in. So why does it matter?
Synaesthesia 4y ago
I like that they are structured as a non-profit, makes me able to trust them a bit easier.
thomastjeffery 4y ago
And I will still likely never use it unless it brings back SMS support in the app.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
anonym29 4y ago
They might not compromise on encryption, but they have no intentions of open sourcing their censorship module either: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/blob/90490c9c84852ed05f65b26e10eff5cd05066dfb/.gitmodules#L1 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/blob/90490c9c8485...
- 93po 4y ago
  There are legitimate reasons for not open sourcing it. It would become effortless to circumvent.
  - anonym29 4y ago
    The argument isn't that it should be open sourced to improve spam detection or efficacy, the argument is that it's being misused as censorship mechanism without calling it that, and that's why it's not open source - it would become readily apparent that it's being used for political censorship if it was open source. If it was just being used for spam filtering and not censorship, it would make much more sense to implement the blocking client-side (on the recipient's device) and provide a user-toggleable flag to disable that functionality. This would enable those who don't want spam and trust the filter to keep the exact same functionality, while allowing those who distrust it or suspect it of censorship to voluntarily opt-out for messages they receive. This would also offload processing costs from Signal's servers to user's devices, which would decrease the operational expenditure incurred by Signal. One reason not to take advantage of that economic incentive is that you don't want your users to have the choice, and you'd not want them to have the choice if you're trying to censor them.
- franga2000 4y ago
  Can y'all chill with calling every instance of a message being deleted censorship? I've heard everything from minecraft chat profanity filters to copyright infringement detection called "censorship", meanwhile there are systems filtering and changing SMS messages based on political sentiment and people living in fear of being arrested, tortured and executed for saying bad things about the ruling class. Call it what it is: Signal is keeping their spam filter private. And history has shown that this is usually the right move.
LinuxBender 4y ago
I suppose people should decide for themselves if they take the word of a centralized service. Convenience is a factor after all. For those that have small circles of friends they wish to chat with and minimize the number of ISP's their traffic traverses, I would suggest tinkering around with uMurmur [1] a lightweight version of Murmur. There are pre-built packages in several operating systems package managers. The configuration is dirt simple [2] and the daemon is very light weight, designed to run on home routers. Use Certbot to generate LE certs or just use self-signed. One TCP and one UDP port must be opened to the daemon or forwarded if on a different device with the default port being 64738. One can set a server-wide password to keep strangers off of it, or set passwords per-channel. It took me about 2 minutes to install and configure uMurmur on Alpine Linux and most of that time was deciding how I wanted to nest channels. The mobile client is Mumla. Just put in the IP or hostname of the uMurmur instance. uMurmur is not E2EE but if it is running on your own router or VM and you are talking with your friends that you know and trust then maybe that is less of an issue given the server is on your hardware. The voice quality is incredible. It uses the OPUS codec and does not require much bandwidth. The client also supports text chat, but that can be disabled in the server if one so wishes. [1] - https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur [2] - https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur/wiki/Configuration https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur/wiki/Configuration
jra_samba 4y ago
"Meredith Whittaker .. in 2018, she was an AI researcher at Google". That is factually incorrect.

422 points by TobTobXX 4y ago

People act when on the precipice. Decentralized e2ee messengers and servers will thrive now in India: xmpp, matrix, session, tox, briar, Jami..

uri4 4y ago
Maybe not, imagine possession of such program is treated same way as a child pornography.
- ls15 4y ago
  How popular would it be to treat people like pedos, just because of an app that they use?
  - wiseowise 4y ago
    Easy. Make everyone think that you have to hide something or create a fake stories that pedos use app X. > if you have nothing to hide, why don’t you show it? Is also “nice” rhetoric that laymen agree with.
    - ls15 4y ago
      I'd assume that India has its fair share of smart people who are able to spot fallacious rhetorics and want to see the bank accounts of officials in return.
      - wiseowise 4y ago
        Smart people don’t dictate things, majority does.
        avidiax 4y ago
        Who is "smarter", the people that manipulate both their philosophy and the majority's opinion to suit their goals, or the people who's smart philosophies are uncompromised but unimplemented?
        wiseowise 4y ago
        You’ll have to consult the opinion of parent comment. I read it as smart=intellectually smart and virtuous.
      - brahma-dev 4y ago
        India has such stuff: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/lok-sabha-passes-bill-to-exempt-political-parties-from-scrutiny-on-foreign-funds-without-debate/article23285764.ece https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/lok-sabha-passes-bill... https://indianexpress.com/article/business/banking-and-finance/electoral-bonds-parties-mop-up-over-rs-10000-crore-since-2018-8062883/ https://indianexpress.com/article/business/banking-and-finan...
  - yesbut 4y ago
    Probably not popular, but it would be really easy for the state to do it. All they need is their larger media outlets to make a few daytime TV story lines featuring these apps in their narratives, a couple big budget movies, some exaggerated "criminal activity" headlines in the major press. Next thing you know we get the next Satanic Scare.
  - soulofmischief 4y ago
    This rhetoric is already applied against onion websites and similar decentralized networks.
  - olliej 4y ago
    No, what the government says is "use of X is sufficient evidence to support a warrant", then the fact the everyone does it is irrelevant - you only use it against enemies so that's the only time it comes up. Because this is likely government triggered invasion of privacy, it's easy to see how a government can then make it appear that a given [ab]use of the law be "legit". In CA for example the standard highway speed limit is 65mph, but everyone drives well over 70 (this isn't a silly "everyone does it", it's a "if you're doing 65 you may well be rear ended"), this means that the CHP can basically choose whoever they want to pull over, despite everyone breaking the same laws. Essentially they've created a system where everyone is breaking a law so that they can then selectively charge.
  - dangerface 4y ago
    The average person uses whatsapp, has no idea about security, has never heard of signal. The media will tell them signal is specifically setup up to prevent law enforcement. They will give an example of a drug dealer that gets caught and has the app on their phone. Even if the dealer didn't use signal for dealing the connection is presented. The average person will connect the dots. Signal is an underground app for illegal stuff. I have nothing to hide so I don't need Signal to exist. People must use signal for the most illegal and disturbing thing I can think of. Signal users must be pedos. Signal must be banned. This is how power uses media to control the masses. They don't need to make the claim they simply present facts in a narrative and allow the average person to connect the dots making them feel like they figured it all out themselves.
jorvi 4y ago
Or they’ll just install the .apk directly? iPhone users are screwed until sideloading becomes a thing, but iPhones represent a tiny market share in India, AFAIK
- black3r 4y ago
  Sideloading on iPhones is already possible, but requires a Mac/PC and is limited for people without paid developer account (max. 3 apps, must reinstall every 7 days, there are windows/mac apps which do it for you automatically). with paid developer account you can sideload unlimited apps and they last a year... If you're interested, check out AltStore, or Sideloadly...

yieldcrv 4y ago

> If India passes a law or deems Signal to not be in compliance with whatever encryption regulation, will you walk? Makes me think of my encounters with US encryption export regulations. I think we're all lucky those aren't enforced.

sneak 4y ago

Reminder that Apple did this domestically for the FBI/iMessage. They intentionally maintain a backdoor in the end to end crypto of iMessage: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive/exclusive-apple-dropped-plan-for-encrypting-backups-after-fbi-complained-sources-idUSKBN1ZK1CT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...

olliej 4y ago
This is incorrect. iMessage is encrypted, the encryption is end-to-end, there are no backdoors. The unencrypted backup is a clear and annoying hole in the apple privacy story, but the non-e2ee iCloud backup does not include any messages (SMS, MMS, or iMessage), Contacts, Calendars, Notes, iCloud Photos, or health data. A local backup is local, and is protected by filesystem encryption on your local storage. So no, iMessage has no backdoors. Basic research would have showed that this claim was bogus.
- alwayslikethis 4y ago
  If my iPhone got run over by a truck, and I log in my apple ID to another iPhone, will I get my messages back?
  - alxmng 4y ago
    Nope, unless you’re using iCloud backup, or your messages can be synced from other devices in the key ring.
    - jorvi 4y ago
      Via that same logic Telegram has ironclad E2E encryption ‘because secret chats’. 99% of people have iCloud backups turned on.
    - olliej 4y ago
      No this is the whole point: if you are using iCloud backups, your messages are not backed up. The _only_ online way to maintain your iMessages is (checks settings) "Messages in the Cloud", which is e2e encrypted - if you lose all your devices there is no recovery path except for the "iCloud Key Vault", but I honestly don't know if that can get you to a point where old messages can be recovered.

a-user-you-like 4y ago

Is there anything more secure than signal that is widely used? Maybe something that doesn’t leak metadata or require a phone number?

ycuser2 4y ago
Threema, but it's not free.
2Gkashmiri 4y ago
matrix
- Gigachad 4y ago
  I have been wondering how censorship resistant matrix is. As far as I know, groups are not hosted on any particular server, it’s some kind of shared consensus. I suppose the moderators would still be at risk of hosting platforms and ISPs dropping their homeserver.
- betwixthewires 4y ago
  Matrix is great, but it leaks a ton of data.
  - fsflover 4y ago
    To whom? AFAIK if you self-host, no data is leaked.
    - rakoo 4y ago
      If you and everyone you talk to are hosted on servers you trust, down to the physical provider, yes. EDIT: if the person you're talking to is hosted on Google, Google has all the metadata. Even if one person is hosted on Google and is part of a room you're in, Google has all the metadata in that room. In 2022 e2ee is the standard for messages but not metadata, and unfortunately Matrix doesn't tackle it, so no, you can't expect 100% privacy.

UberFly 4y ago

Requiring handing over encryption keys as a requirement to do business there sounds like a good way to sanction yourself from the modern world.

checkyoursudo 4y ago
As much as I agree with you according to my own principles, I would not underestimate the sacrifice-anything-for-profits side of the cost-benefit analysis that many businesses will perform.
- als0 4y ago
  Signal is a nonprofit though. They shouldn't be under pressure to create business.
  - sschueller 4y ago
    Non profit but still against federation or anyone running an alternative client. Why?
    - 411111111111111 4y ago
      It's a non profit so it can receive donations, but the developer is a LLC that's run for profit. It's a similar story in almost all software companies that market themselves as non-profit foundations (Mozilla too btw) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation#Signal_Messenger_LLC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation#Signal_Mes...
      - Vinnl 4y ago
        The effect is the same as it is for "regular" non-profits: there are no shareholders (other than the non-profit), and so no incentives to maximise profits. (Of course employees and board members can still receive handsome compensation, but the same holds true for regular non-profits.)
      - 4y ago

shauryamanu 4y ago

Why doesn't govt improve its own machinery instead of trying to spy on its citizens? Do they think this way they'll improve the society? Like China?

_5uxp 4y ago
all about power
DocTomoe 4y ago
The first function of a state is to ensure the continued existence of the state. Which is threatened a lot more by civil uprisings as compared to an external actor, especially in a time when international relations are relatively stable (current security events being the formerly-normal that is today's extreme). Another "storm on the Capitol" is so much more damaging to the US as it exists today as compared to a border skirmish with the Chinese over Taiwan.
- FortiDude 4y ago
  The state wouldn't fear civil uprising if it made its citizens' lives half decent
  - DocTomoe 4y ago
    Then it would take away from other powerful factions, which will then ... overthrow the state. The idea of an unified, altruistic populus which will put the average wellbeing over their own is utopian - in both senses of the word. Reading suggestion: The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics, by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith
beebeepka 4y ago
Tell me which country doesn't spy on its citizens.

JohnJamesRambo 4y ago

Proud of Signal’s stance on this!

alxmng 4y ago

How is Signal tied to the region? What does it mean to “exit” India, exactly?

throwaway4good 4y ago
App store, dns, routable ip-address.
NavinF 4y ago
It means they'll get banned from the app stores and have their server IPs blackholed.
- avidiax 4y ago
  This is one of the pro/cons of trusting a messaging service from one of the big internet players. Sure Google/Facebook are profit-seeking enterprises, and won't put everything on the line for a privacy promise. However neither of those companies is terribly easy to just blackhole. You can blackhole some IPs, but you'll also be causing your own business and government endless technical headaches since those IPs also serve local ads, shared folders and documents, government outreach channels, cloud services, etc.

2Gkashmiri 4y ago

eh. good riddance. unless they move away from mobile number requirement, they are as bad as telegram or whatsapp as the local police has been known to phish for phone numbers and physcailly harrass them and what not. https://thenextweb.com/news/kashmirs-police-want-people-to-register-their-whatsapp-groups https://thenextweb.com/news/kashmirs-police-want-people-to-r... https://kashmirobserver.net/2021/12/23/police-warns-social-media-users-in-kashmir-second-time-in-10-days/ https://kashmirobserver.net/2021/12/23/police-warns-social-m... https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/agra/in-up-district-register-with-government-to-run-a-whatsapp-group/articleshow/65616666.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/agra/in-up-district... https://theintercept.com/2020/12/06/kashmir-social-media-police/ https://theintercept.com/2020/12/06/kashmir-social-media-pol... this is for tweeting but twitter is a public platform, same as your "mobile number" because twitter forces 2fa that makes you put your mobile for "security" reasons. what i am trying to say is, this is not about police needing 100% access to find pedophiles. This is about crushing dissent, about the same big brother type are what people in india are seeing unless they join the ruling party. This is out in the open now and has for some time. This is the way of the government to force big players to comply. lets say tomorrow signal and whatsapp BOTH remove mobile number requirement. Now, unless the ISP are made to identify their specific traffic and block them on demand, ALL the users would be independent from local indian administrative action

willi59549879 4y ago

India wants to read everything? Why don't they just forbid the use of https. So that everyone can read everything on the internet

antikneejerk 4y ago
I read the linked source. Could not find any reference to any Indian law or Govt. order. Can you please point me to any source with credible information on the supposed provisions which are causing Signal to "exit" India.
- dagmx 4y ago
  https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-to-intercept-encrypted-messages-on-whatsapp-signal-101663830524846.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-...
  - antikneejerk 4y ago
    Thanks. Again this article does not link to the supposed draft bill, and what it actually says. They directly jump to saying government wants to "intercept". How does the Govt propose to intercept? What was actually proposed in the bill? They also say the Govt. is seeking public feedback on the draft. Ideally this news source should link to the draft in question so that people can read, and raise their objections.
- hummerbliss 4y ago
  Its was a proposed law (to solicit feedback). Signal is not exiting but would exit if such law comes to India. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-to-intercept-encrypted-messages-on-whatsapp-signal-101663830524846.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-proposes-law-... But Telecom Authority of India rules out any immediate intervention. https://tech.hindustantimes.com/tech/news/trai-rules-out-regulatory-intervention-for-ott-communication-services-71600134486496.html https://tech.hindustantimes.com/tech/news/trai-rules-out-reg... I couldn't quote from the article here but looks like they are going to wait till clarity emerges from International jurisdiction.

throwaway4good 4y ago

Tech companies will make all sort of noise when India, China, Turkey ask to have access and control over the data of their own people. However when NSA comes around with their secret laws and courts, they all bend the knee ...

bobsmooth 4y ago
That's because the NSA doesn't make big public statements. They just install a little black box in your servers and you don't say anything.
- AshamedCaptain 4y ago
  That's because when the NSA comes knocking to your door you are also prevented from disclaiming the fact that the NSA came to visit. Unless you like the hospitality of prison, that is.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
password4321 4y ago
Or go to jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio

baka367 4y ago

Is it me or India is becoming the next China?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jpgvm 4y ago
People really have warped perceptions of different Asian nations. As someone that has been a resident of most of them they are mostly all like China... which shouldn't be surprising there is a lot of shared cultural history in the region and by and large they are more collectivist societies. Some are obviously worse (looking at you Myanmar) but most are various shades of authoritarian (Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, etc) and most have heavy censorship (yeah the same culprits again). This shouldn't surprise anyone and yet it always seems to.
- FooBarWidget 4y ago
  This talk by professor Jeffrey Sachs at the Athens Democracy Forum couldn't be more timely. https://youtu.be/Ec2E4k1K52E https://youtu.be/Ec2E4k1K52E Different countries have long, deep-rooted political cultures that go back centuries. "Democracy vs authoritarianism" is the wrong lens: different systems are complex and cannot be ranked on an easy scale like we want them to.
  - oytis 4y ago
    It's not the wrong lens, it's a lens that authoritarian governments and their supporters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs#China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs#China) don't want people to use.
    - FooBarWidget 4y ago
      Interestingly, those push this sentiment the strongest, are also often those who deny others of having any sort of legitimate perspective, using methods that boil down to character assasination rather than argumentative refutation. It seems that such people want to monopolize on what constitutes the truth. That seems a bit... authoritarian to me?

dheerajvs 4y ago

> Some things are a bit Boolean, as Whittaker states above, but some things are simply binary. Eh, what's the difference? It's better to read the original article: https://www.theverge.com/23409716/signal-encryption-messaging-sms-meredith-whittaker-imessage-whatsapp-china https://www.theverge.com/23409716/signal-encryption-messagin...

dang 4y ago
Ok, we changed to that from https://www.techdirt.com/2022/10/26/signal-says-it-will-exit-india-rather-than-compromise-its-encryption/ https://www.techdirt.com/2022/10/26/signal-says-it-will-exit.... Thanks!

gandutraveler 4y ago

I do want to hear more about how signal and other companies are working to prevent their apps being used by bad actors, terrorists.

polopo568866 4y ago
I do want to hear more about how toll road management companies are working to prevent their roads being used by bad actors, terrorists. Food manufacturers should also ensure that they are not contributing to feeding bad actors... People like you being so easily manipulated by governments are extremely dangerous to democracy.
- RadixDLT 4y ago
  hey, hey, hey Dont give these companies any ideas, chase bank already closes your account if you say something they dont like.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lotqrpa 4y ago
The greatest mystery to me is how anyone can think you can somehow stop 'bad actors' from communicating over the Internet other than banning it as a whole.
- Anunayj 4y ago
  Exactly! "Oh no now I will have to use a illegal app to commit my illegal activities". Banning encryption doesn't stop bad actors from communicating over encryption, it just adds to the number of illegal things they did.
beermonster 4y ago
Next we would like to hear more about what owners of open spaces are doing allowing bad humans to use them to communicate sounding words over air.
4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

hunglee2 4y ago

Big govt vs big tech, a battle that is being played out all over the world. Any country that value sovereignty and sees itself as an independent actor rather than a vassal state, must take the position India is taking, or else be susceptible to foreign owned apps influencing its citizenry. The only alternative would be to insist Signal hire its security agents into product / moderator roles, so that oversight can be conducted in more implicit ways. Not great for the users, but the world where globalised technology makes everyone friends is over

pmalynin 4y ago
I mean ok, but Signal is not big tech and provides orders of magnitude more positive value to society than say Facebook.
kragen 4y ago
> Big govt vs big tech Signal has 40 employees.
- MichaelZuo 4y ago
  It does give the impression that the parent has no clue what their talking about.
vasco 4y ago
> be susceptible to foreign owned apps influencing its citizenry Are they banning all of the internet, books, movies and everything else too? Your position is that a state needs to control what the citizens can consume otherwise it's a vassal state? My country lived under dictatorship with hard censorship before, and reading your comment that was the vibes I got.
- hunglee2 4y ago
  nothing is getting banned, governments are asking for access, which Signal is signalling it will refuse and withdraw service. India is a democracy, like the US, which makes similar requests for access for its domestic tech / media firms, as well demand the same for the few foreign owned ones which have had success in the country.

dheera 4y ago

How can they exit India if they never entered it? As long as they don't have a business entity there they can still keep running it, and it would be upto India to create a national firewall if they so wish to, otherwise their citizens would be able to still access Signal without any issues.

supermatt 4y ago

> WhatsApp does not protect metadata the way that Signal does. Signal knows nothing about who you are. This isn't strictly true though, no? Signal knows your mobile phone number. I appreciate that this is for facilitating usability, but its still a piece of metadata that can specifically be used to identify you - and signal knows it. You cant even use signal without verifying a mobile phone number AFAIK. They really shouldnt be making false statements like this. It undermines their (otherwise admirable) position.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
beermonster 4y ago
I think this means, assuming it’s not a burner SIM bought with cash, that someone could “only” identify you were a signal user. They wouldn’t be able to see your social graph , who you contacted and when, from where, what was said, what groups you were in. I also thought I’d read on HN recently that they were looking at making this optional in the future but don’t quote me on that !

jb_007 4y ago

A noob question, how does signal know/prevent use of its app for illegal/criminal activities? Larger question here would be - Do governments and security agencies need to keep a tab on social media to check for illegal activities

flipbrad 4y ago
Illegal under which laws. Qatari law, which outlaws homosexuality? Russian law, which prohibits referring to the "invasion" of Ukraine? Or do you assume everyone around the world is subject to US law, so it's fine for all our messages to be intercepted and checked for compliance with US law?
ilyt 4y ago
> A noob question, how does signal know/prevent use of its app for illegal/criminal activities? If you allow for privacy you allow for illegal usage. There is no way around it. > Larger question here would be - Do governments and security agencies need to keep a tab on social media to check for illegal activities They can do it old fashioned way. Also every compromise on security can be used by bad actors as well, and in some cases government is that bad actor, even in 1st world countries.
arynda 4y ago
The same way a spoken language is a communication tool and doesn't restrict what is discussed.
beermonster 4y ago
This is answered in the article.
pelario 4y ago
What about phone companies ?
sliken 4y ago
How do roads prevent speeding, drug trafficing, human trafficing, fraud, etc?

UltraViolence 4y ago

Signal is too small a player and is therefore more likely to be bullied by governments. India is taking pot shots at it to see if it can get away with forcing them into intercepting communications. If they leave as a result, they'll simply shrug and move on. Also, I'm convinced that if Signal were to become popular they'd probably sell it to some commercial provider, since the cost of maintaining a service used by hundreds of millions if not billions is extremely expensive. WhatsApp is an entirely different matter. Hundreds of millions of Indians probably use it and if the company were to suspend service because the Indian government mandated a backdoor all hell would break loose! For the same reason both Australia and the UK haven't as of yet forced WhatsApp to install a backdoor, even though legislation forcing them to do so is already in place there.

sroussey 4y ago
How do you know that there is not a back door in WhatsApp?
- jostyee 4y ago
  Presumption of innocence, or do you have seen any evidence to prove it exist, besides Durov's shit from time to time?
  - shiomiru 4y ago
    In the context of privacy, you can pretty much assume every black box is compromised. With Telegram this black box is the server (the client is open source); with WhatsApp, it's the client. I suppose there's threat models where WA still wins, but knowing it's owned by Meta, I have a hard time imagining what such a threat model would look like.
    - pseudo0 4y ago
      Is the Whatsapp client really a black box? APKs are fairly straightforward to decompile back to Smali or a reasonable approximation of Java, or people on rooted devices can hook it with Frida. Of course source code would be better, but it would be pretty brazen to stick a backdoor in an app store release. App versions for popular apps get archived by numerous third-party sites, so even a temporary backdoor in one specific version would be archived forever. That would be putting their reputation and billions of dollars on the line. Non-E2E with black box server code like Telegram is far more concerning, in my opinion. With a system like that, it would be trivial to backdoor and leave behind no evidence after the fact.

ThePowerOfFuet 4y ago

>“A big part of our model is telling people not to take our word for it.” That's rich, coming from a company that wasn't (and probably still isn't) running the code they made public. >So if I want to fork Signal and make my own, I can just take the code and do it today? >People do it. There are many of those. We don’t endorse them because we can’t guarantee or validate them — we don’t have the time or the resources for that. But yes, there are many out there. Sure, but you can't use them with the same server cluster everyone else in the world is using, making it about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

stevewatson301 4y ago

Whenever India and its authoritarian stances are mentioned, a number of folks (I presume Indians, both on HN and elsewhere) come out of the woodwork to sing praises of "national security" while saying nothing about how such power can be abused. It is truly sad to see that an entire populace can't see the perils of a government with broad-reaching powers, when government institutions jailing the opposition, censoring the press, and supressing minorities is rather commonplace there[1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_Muslims_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_Muslims_in_In...

minraws 4y ago
Well that's what we call power of propaganda, I say that as an Indian(still living in India). I honestly couldn't do anything even after writing letters, talking to friends who can talk to people who make shitty decisions, just cause there is no larger sentiment against these decisions, things just go by. And now I have to say I am not sure when will the general public understand this issue, or will they ever. Are we just too lazy to do anything about it, or too divided to put up a fight... Truly sad to see. Taking away rights to privacy is not the way of fighting the wrongs and problematic elements, and considering how corrupt our system can be I have no hope of it not being abused wildly. :(
- minraws 4y ago
  Btw if anyone here is from Australia, you guys had a similar bill a few years ago correct? what happened after that? I am curious any hope of overturning this stuff from the sheer corporate backlash? Or, maybe I am too optimistic about people who sold their souls for money, making a stand.
  - SturgeonsLaw 4y ago
    Yeah, the Assistance and Access Act (2018) passed and is still the law of the land. It gave law enforcement, intelligence and the government the ability to compel Australian providers to backdoor their services. Can't tell you how often it's been invoked since it also allows for gag orders. Probably only 1 out of 10 Aussies would have even heard of it. The mainstream media here are about half a dozen ideologically aligned corporations who are not the type to ask hard questions, and the average Australian is focused only on their wealth, their family or their recreation.

cornel_io 4y ago

Meredith Whittaker was always an activist, and her being in charge of a big product doesn't change that, it just increases the risk. I don't believe for one second that if push comes to shove and she thinks it's an important cause she won't wield her power to cut through the supposed security of Signal and expose "undesirables" to the light of day and leak all their private info. I would not trust this product anymore, especially if you are not a hard leftist like her.

2-718-281-828 4y ago

Here's one major problem with Signal - you cannot delete contacts. Following scenario: 1) X communicates with Y using Signal trying to hide from Iranian police 2) Y is getting arrested and who ever is found to have his phone number is getting in to trouble as well 3) X deletes Y from its contacts 4) Y stays in X's contacts on Signal no matter what now what should X do? delete Signal? theoretically the police could reinstall it and see who you had in your contacts. There have been several issues opened for this problem on GitHub for years. They all get closed by their bot after couple of weeks. I have several ghost numbers and even ghost user names on my Signal clients. Super annoying and cluttering my list of contacts. For me Signal is just one option to avoid WhatsApp. But boy do I prefer Telegram ...

dodgerdan 4y ago
Usernames are under development right now so this will address this issue one way or another.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mlatu 4y ago
it's either one pile of poo or another it seems... hosting your own matrix homeserver is probably not a thing you would like to do?

quitit 4y ago

Dear messaging services (Signal, Whatsapp, etc.) You don't get to say "hey our messaging service is more secure than x, y or z" That kind of statement can only be stated by external, independent researchers, not the marketing department. This thread alone has already pointed to a number safety/security issues that are neither obscure, unreasonable nor able to be addressed by the user. Additionally I wouldn't even describe Signal as the safest option available in comparison to the many E2EE widely available chat programs.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

mlatu 4y ago

fucking lying is what they do! how come, if they do not share data with third parties, that a "breakin" at TWILIO would have any consequence on signal? the app store claims data is not shared with 3rd parties, yet they use twilio to "verify phonenumbers" how about verifing them yourself? to expensive...? so twilio does it for free for you? what the fishy fuck is going on here? sure they do mention verifying the numbers with a third party in their terms & privacy policy, but the rest of their communication/advertising just very misleading and fishy, claiming they dont keep any data on you. i never liked or trusted signal, especially not with marlon"no federation for u"spike and not with auntie "i used to work for the FTC" either.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
maxwell 4y ago
https://twilio.com/verify https://twilio.com/verify
- mlatu 4y ago
  and? is it a free service? .. no it's not. what is your point?

nrvn 4y ago

Encryption is just a tip of the iceberg here. There are several major problems with Signal: - it is not that private after all since it requires a phone number. Yes, you can override this by using some virtual throwaway number if you are geeky enough but your account will be associated with this phone number anyways. - as a consequence you _will_ receive spam from bots fanning out messages to phone numbers. You can’t restrict your social circle to allow only chosen people or let’s say people only from your contact list to message you. - Signal protocol is probably great from the e2ee perspective but it is not federated and unlike XMPP you cannot spin up your own server and have full control over it. - Since the end product is not a protocol or a framework or a platform it is a product that is run by other people who you can only trust albeit you can verify and audit source code by yourself(or by hiring someone to do it on your behalf). And I am sure you cannot run an end-to-end audit of the whole Signal platform to verify that what they actually run has been built from the source code you have audited. - Since it is centralized, Signal is prone to censorship in those countries that decide to fight it. This leads to introducing workarounds like this https://signal.org/blog/run-a-proxy/ https://signal.org/blog/run-a-proxy/ to help people circumvent limitations in affected regions and territories.

nicce 4y ago
The solutions for the most of the issues you are describing comes with great usability costs. It is already hard to make non-tech people to switch from WhatsApp.
- jakecopp 4y ago
  > The solutions for the most of the issues you are describing comes with great usability costs. What costs? Element (a popular Matrix client) has recently improved their onboarding greatly! https://element.io/blog/all-aboard-better-ftue-for-less-wtf/ https://element.io/blog/all-aboard-better-ftue-for-less-wtf/ It really is just as easy to onboard to Element as Signal these days, the UX has come a long way. And you'll never have the move them again, because you can choose any client you like.
  - 4y ago

c7DJTLrn 4y ago

Neither Signal, WhatsApp, or Telegram are particularly secure. On Signal for example, your private key is protected only by a verification text message and short PIN. That's very low entropy compared to a full ED25519 keypair. It's better than SMS but don't be fooled into thinking you have Snowden-level opsec because you use one of these apps. Use PGP and email.

KAMSPioneer 4y ago
> your private key is protected only by a verification text message and short PIN. That's very low entropy compared to a full ED25519 keypair. Can you explain what you mean by this? In practice, I can see the argument that the only verified identity (phone number) for most users is the one protected by a flimsy SMS verification message, but I don't believe that that implies your private key is terribly vulnerable to e.g. SIM swap attacks. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. Put another way: if you rigidly adhere to out-of-band-verified pubkeys for contacts, you should be fairly safe. True that Signal's UI makes this hard to do, but that's a different conversation than "your keys are only protected by SMS verification".
- tialaramex 4y ago
  > True that Signal's UI makes this hard to do Do you think so? The app provides a "Safety Number" and QR code with built-in scanner to verify that yup, your device and their device have nobody in the middle. It has a visible reminder that you checked this person's actual identity (if you did) and a message appears if the keys change. If you are "rigidly adhering" to protocol your response should be to arrange an in-person meet-up to reconfirm, not "New phone? Cool".
  - KAMSPioneer 4y ago
    I agree that verification is easy. I think they have softened the warnings and behavior surrounding key changes to accommodate their users that have virtually no understanding of crypto (i.e. the majority of people). It's an understandable position for them to take, but yes, in my opinion the alarm bells when a key unexpectedly changes are more oriented towards casual users than a (to paraphrase c7DJTLrn) Snowden-level user. For the latter, I expect behavior more similar to an OpenSSH key mismatch (which is quite a bit more strongly worded than Signal's).

NayamAmarshe 4y ago

In reality, none of the popular apps that advertise themselves as a forefront of Privacy are safe. Decentralized protocols are the only viable alternatives to 'normie' chat apps like Telegram & Signal. Speek! is a new app that looks promising: https://speek.network/ https://speek.network/

veronikamartin 4y ago

[flagged]

fedeb95 4y ago

"Says"

iLoveOncall 4y ago

I mean this is not a surprising announcement given that encryption is their only selling point over competitors.

SnowHill9902 4y ago

Couldn’t one just do PGP over WhatsApp, over Telegram or whatever? Instead of sending a plaintext message you’d send the PGP message but using existing infrastructure. Then there’d only be metadata to harvest but content should definitely be secure.

nousermane 4y ago
[OTR] would probably be a goto for encrypting instant messages. But both that & PGP require a 3rd-party client (pidgin/adium/etc...), if user wants to retain at least some usability. And nowadays, every popular IM network wants 3rd-party clients off their net at all costs. Signal is on the better side of the spectrum here. While they explicitly say they don't support non-official clients connecting to the official network, this isn't rigorously enforced. WA, on the other hand, would permaban your whole account if you even so much as try to use 3rd-party client. [] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging
jvolkman 4y ago
Android's Messages app does this. RCS isn't end-to-end encrypted, but Messages adds the Signal protocol on top. https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf

O__________O 4y ago

I have nothing against Signal, Moxie, etc — but it attracts high-value targets. As such, Signal is an extremely high-value target. >> Signal knows nothing about who you are. This is based on trust, not systematic proofs, Signal knows this, yet never tells its users. For example, Signal uses Intel’s Software Guard Extensions (SGX) - which is know to have multiple attacks, any of which Signal might be forced to run using national security letter. They have also had multiple data breaches, which I am guessing average user is not aware of. Moxie is still on the board, and he personally refused multiple times to remove the requirement for a phone number. Lastly, Signals three board members have all been the leader of Signal in last year and I have been unable to find their most recent 990 non-profit disclosure.

password4321 4y ago
Signal does marketing by omission: "Intel’s SGX protects against introspection", "we depend on donations from our community", etc.
- O__________O 4y ago
  Would it be possible for you to expand on Signal not being dependent on donations?
  - adamch 4y ago
    They also received a very large amount of funding from some successful tech founders, Brian Acton and Pavel Durov
    - O__________O 4y ago
      My understanding was that the funds from Brian Acton were a loan to be repaid, though might be wrong. I was unable to quickly locate any information relate to Pavel Durov having any financial relationship with Signal.
  - password4321 4y ago

faitswulff 4y ago

> Signal makes its code open-source. Is anyone aware of whether they are still obscuring spam related code? For the downvoters: - 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... - https://signal.org/blog/keeping-spam-off-signal/ https://signal.org/blog/keeping-spam-off-signal/

rosnd 4y ago
Okay, but so what? Why is this a problem? You can run a functional signal server without their spam filtering code.
- faitswulff 4y ago
  It's a matter of trust. If I can't trust that it's truly open source, then it erodes some of the confidence I have in them. I haven't personally tried running a functional Signal server without the spam filtering code, so I don't know if it truly works without it.

osigurdson 4y ago

For now…

lizardactivist 4y ago

Signal is already compromised. I don't understand why people still keep fooling themselves it's private and secure. It requires a mobile number, and thus your identity is known and your device is uniquely identifiable anyway, and it's also developed in the US where three-letter agencies have infinite reach and control.

sliken 4y ago
Yes, your signal identity is tied to a phone number. But attackers can't tell who you are talking to, or what groups you are in. So why does it matter?

Synaesthesia 4y ago

I like that they are structured as a non-profit, makes me able to trust them a bit easier.

thomastjeffery 4y ago

And I will still likely never use it unless it brings back SMS support in the app.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

anonym29 4y ago

They might not compromise on encryption, but they have no intentions of open sourcing their censorship module either: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/blob/90490c9c84852ed05f65b26e10eff5cd05066dfb/.gitmodules#L1 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server/blob/90490c9c8485...

93po 4y ago
There are legitimate reasons for not open sourcing it. It would become effortless to circumvent.
- anonym29 4y ago
  The argument isn't that it should be open sourced to improve spam detection or efficacy, the argument is that it's being misused as censorship mechanism without calling it that, and that's why it's not open source - it would become readily apparent that it's being used for political censorship if it was open source. If it was just being used for spam filtering and not censorship, it would make much more sense to implement the blocking client-side (on the recipient's device) and provide a user-toggleable flag to disable that functionality. This would enable those who don't want spam and trust the filter to keep the exact same functionality, while allowing those who distrust it or suspect it of censorship to voluntarily opt-out for messages they receive. This would also offload processing costs from Signal's servers to user's devices, which would decrease the operational expenditure incurred by Signal. One reason not to take advantage of that economic incentive is that you don't want your users to have the choice, and you'd not want them to have the choice if you're trying to censor them.
franga2000 4y ago
Can y'all chill with calling every instance of a message being deleted censorship? I've heard everything from minecraft chat profanity filters to copyright infringement detection called "censorship", meanwhile there are systems filtering and changing SMS messages based on political sentiment and people living in fear of being arrested, tortured and executed for saying bad things about the ruling class. Call it what it is: Signal is keeping their spam filter private. And history has shown that this is usually the right move.

LinuxBender 4y ago

I suppose people should decide for themselves if they take the word of a centralized service. Convenience is a factor after all. For those that have small circles of friends they wish to chat with and minimize the number of ISP's their traffic traverses, I would suggest tinkering around with uMurmur [1] a lightweight version of Murmur. There are pre-built packages in several operating systems package managers. The configuration is dirt simple [2] and the daemon is very light weight, designed to run on home routers. Use Certbot to generate LE certs or just use self-signed. One TCP and one UDP port must be opened to the daemon or forwarded if on a different device with the default port being 64738. One can set a server-wide password to keep strangers off of it, or set passwords per-channel. It took me about 2 minutes to install and configure uMurmur on Alpine Linux and most of that time was deciding how I wanted to nest channels. The mobile client is Mumla. Just put in the IP or hostname of the uMurmur instance. uMurmur is not E2EE but if it is running on your own router or VM and you are talking with your friends that you know and trust then maybe that is less of an issue given the server is on your hardware. The voice quality is incredible. It uses the OPUS codec and does not require much bandwidth. The client also supports text chat, but that can be disabled in the server if one so wishes. [1] - https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur [2] - https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur/wiki/Configuration https://github.com/umurmur/umurmur/wiki/Configuration

jra_samba 4y ago

"Meredith Whittaker .. in 2018, she was an AI researcher at Google". That is factually incorrect.