6 ms·

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.)
      - tialaramex 4y ago
        There are some things non-profits are not allowed to do. But, owning a for-profit isn't one of them, and the for-profit is allowed to do those things. So hence this is a common strategy. Example: Suppose I bulk buy T-shirts printed with my cool logo for $15 each and I sell them to consumers for $50 each. That's a for-profit activity, if Walmart was allowed to have a "non-profit" arm which did this I'm sure they would, the tax saving would be considerable.
        joshuamorton 4y ago
        That's decidedly not what "nonprofit" means. A nonprofit can absolutely fundraise like that, and pay the employees above market salaries, or they can use the funds for other things, they just can't return them to shareholders (of which there aren't any), or the board.
    - m12k 4y ago
      The good answer: They can't verify the integrity of alternative clients and that they don't leak info The other answer: They've got somewhat of a "we know best" vibe going for them which also comes in play when you see their response to feature requests - e.g. for usernames instead of phone numbers or for "edit message" functionality like Telegram has.
      - Vinnl 4y ago
        I don't know what response to username feature requests you're talking about, but AFAIK they've been saying for a long time already that they're working on that — but it's a significant rework of their architecture, so it understandably is taking a long time, especially to also do so in a privacy preserving way.
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        >The good answer: They can't verify the integrity of alternative clients and that they don't leak info The good answer isn't even a good argument. The client is open source. People have forked it and used the Signal network. Signal asked them to stop and they did, but there is nothing stopping people from ignoring Signal's request in the future. This has nothing to do with federation. Signal could federate their network and still request everybody use the official client.
        Klonoar 4y ago
        Your point in no way explains why the argument from Signal is bad, and arguably completely misses the point.
        _-david-_ 4y ago
        My point is client integrity and federation of servers are not related.
        atonse 4y ago
        What exactly is the problem anyone would be trying to solve by adding third party clients?
    - Vinnl 4y ago
      That's described here: https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ (And also extensively discussed elsewhere on HN already, if you want to dive into it some more.)
    - cvwright 4y ago
      Because federation is seriously difficult — look at all the effort the Matrix team has put in, and it’s still not quite 100%. Plus yes Signal has a bit of an NIH complex.
      - admax88qqq 4y ago
        Matrix federation is hard because they want to support large IRV style rooms with consistent history and strong controls to prevent room takeovers. Signal is more focused on 1:1 or small group chats. Federation there can be much simpler, more like email/xmpp than IRC. It does still add friction and slows down youe development as upgrading is difficult.
        saynay 4y ago
        Signal also has a grand total of 40 employees. Keeping the application running on the various platforms takes a decent chunk of their time. Difficult development to add something like federation cannot be expected to happen quickly.
    - johnchristopher 4y ago
      You know perfectly why, as your comment history shows.
beebmam 4y ago
Isn't this what Bill Barr and the Trump administration wanted, too? https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-william-p-barr-introduction-lawful-access-bill-senate https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-wi...
- cvwright 4y ago
  What is it about that guy, that makes people unable to stop talking about him? Was it not enough for him to be the top story in the news every day for 4 years?
  - BuckRogers 4y ago
    He was our president, every former president is newsworthy. Even when they just speak out. January 6th and the theft of top secret documents including nuclear secrets guarantees that he's not leaving the news cycle anytime soon. If he's not charged with a crime that is disqualifying for president, most expect him to run and deny any loss, ensuring our republic is overthrown by a banana republic as well. Many folks are keeping eyes on him. There's really no other political figure with as much unrestricted aggression as he has. I certainly don't have his nerve, I have far too much respect for the founders and institutions of our government to so willfully rage against it. I guess our greatest leaders, Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt and everything we've built till now humbles me. But unlike Mr. Trump, I also was working as a paperboy at 12 years old, worked night shifts during college, and never got a break being unemployed all the way into my 40s now. There's a bigger difference between someone like me and Trump, and people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds. That's why I never saw eye to eye with him. But he is pretty fascinating. The audacity and outright disregard for our institutions is absolutely astonishing. I do hope the media spotlight remains on him for the rest of his life, I don't want that guy flying under the radar. He's a reminder of what America's worst inclinations can produce. Never worked a job (other than President of the United States of America), was born at the finish line, and a soul full of man's worst inclinations. And believe me, I agree with at least 75%+ of "his" policies. I remain an independent. If I had to describe my leanings it would be a "pre-MAGA Republican, who supports unions". These parties have to work for my vote and cannot count on my vote.. In case, you think someone saying the things I have is somehow anti-Trump. If I am, it's only because it makes sense to be so.
cheeze 4y ago
China does it just fine
intothemild 4y ago
Especially when companies are looking to move their manufacturing from China... India just shot itself in the foot
- throwoutway 4y ago
  China has been regulating encryption and requiring escrow on businesses and breaking encryption for years
ahoy93 4y ago
I remember an IETF meeting where this was discussed and turned down. This was 25+ years ago, and it seems to pop up again and again. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp200.html https://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp200.html
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
sneak 4y ago
I mean, this is how the USA works. It is widely speculated that the USG will retaliate against Apple for shipping true end-to-end encryption software that does not enable surveillance unless they (Apple) do some sort of clientside scanning. This seems to indicate that Apple's 1A rights to publish software are being infringed. Presently all large/webscale messengers in the USA (iMessage, WhatsApp, etc) all have backdoors in the e2ee that allow the FBI et al to access message content at will (often without a warrant or probable cause).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ajsnigrutin 4y ago
Many countries tried this, even the ones we consider the "modern world" (like france, more than once). Some even prohibited export of encryption, so they could more easily decrypt foreign traffic (usa). Some protocols were even designed with "alternative" encryption, intentionally weakened (GSM).
m463 4y ago
unfortunately, there are things they could do without "turning over encryption keys". Scanning for keywords, doing content id on images, all kinds of other stuff that would not "turn over encryption keys". I suspect other services do these things for advertising keywords, and to prevent objectionable images from being sent.

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.)
    - tialaramex 4y ago
      There are some things non-profits are not allowed to do. But, owning a for-profit isn't one of them, and the for-profit is allowed to do those things. So hence this is a common strategy. Example: Suppose I bulk buy T-shirts printed with my cool logo for $15 each and I sell them to consumers for $50 each. That's a for-profit activity, if Walmart was allowed to have a "non-profit" arm which did this I'm sure they would, the tax saving would be considerable.
      - joshuamorton 4y ago
        That's decidedly not what "nonprofit" means. A nonprofit can absolutely fundraise like that, and pay the employees above market salaries, or they can use the funds for other things, they just can't return them to shareholders (of which there aren't any), or the board.
  - m12k 4y ago
    The good answer: They can't verify the integrity of alternative clients and that they don't leak info The other answer: They've got somewhat of a "we know best" vibe going for them which also comes in play when you see their response to feature requests - e.g. for usernames instead of phone numbers or for "edit message" functionality like Telegram has.
    - Vinnl 4y ago
      I don't know what response to username feature requests you're talking about, but AFAIK they've been saying for a long time already that they're working on that — but it's a significant rework of their architecture, so it understandably is taking a long time, especially to also do so in a privacy preserving way.
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      >The good answer: They can't verify the integrity of alternative clients and that they don't leak info The good answer isn't even a good argument. The client is open source. People have forked it and used the Signal network. Signal asked them to stop and they did, but there is nothing stopping people from ignoring Signal's request in the future. This has nothing to do with federation. Signal could federate their network and still request everybody use the official client.
      - Klonoar 4y ago
        Your point in no way explains why the argument from Signal is bad, and arguably completely misses the point.
        _-david-_ 4y ago
        My point is client integrity and federation of servers are not related.
      - atonse 4y ago
        What exactly is the problem anyone would be trying to solve by adding third party clients?
  - Vinnl 4y ago
    That's described here: https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ (And also extensively discussed elsewhere on HN already, if you want to dive into it some more.)
  - cvwright 4y ago
    Because federation is seriously difficult — look at all the effort the Matrix team has put in, and it’s still not quite 100%. Plus yes Signal has a bit of an NIH complex.
    - admax88qqq 4y ago
      Matrix federation is hard because they want to support large IRV style rooms with consistent history and strong controls to prevent room takeovers. Signal is more focused on 1:1 or small group chats. Federation there can be much simpler, more like email/xmpp than IRC. It does still add friction and slows down youe development as upgrading is difficult.
      - saynay 4y ago
        Signal also has a grand total of 40 employees. Keeping the application running on the various platforms takes a decent chunk of their time. Difficult development to add something like federation cannot be expected to happen quickly.
  - johnchristopher 4y ago
    You know perfectly why, as your comment history shows.

beebmam 4y ago

Isn't this what Bill Barr and the Trump administration wanted, too? https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-william-p-barr-introduction-lawful-access-bill-senate https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-wi...

cvwright 4y ago
What is it about that guy, that makes people unable to stop talking about him? Was it not enough for him to be the top story in the news every day for 4 years?
- BuckRogers 4y ago
  He was our president, every former president is newsworthy. Even when they just speak out. January 6th and the theft of top secret documents including nuclear secrets guarantees that he's not leaving the news cycle anytime soon. If he's not charged with a crime that is disqualifying for president, most expect him to run and deny any loss, ensuring our republic is overthrown by a banana republic as well. Many folks are keeping eyes on him. There's really no other political figure with as much unrestricted aggression as he has. I certainly don't have his nerve, I have far too much respect for the founders and institutions of our government to so willfully rage against it. I guess our greatest leaders, Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt and everything we've built till now humbles me. But unlike Mr. Trump, I also was working as a paperboy at 12 years old, worked night shifts during college, and never got a break being unemployed all the way into my 40s now. There's a bigger difference between someone like me and Trump, and people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds. That's why I never saw eye to eye with him. But he is pretty fascinating. The audacity and outright disregard for our institutions is absolutely astonishing. I do hope the media spotlight remains on him for the rest of his life, I don't want that guy flying under the radar. He's a reminder of what America's worst inclinations can produce. Never worked a job (other than President of the United States of America), was born at the finish line, and a soul full of man's worst inclinations. And believe me, I agree with at least 75%+ of "his" policies. I remain an independent. If I had to describe my leanings it would be a "pre-MAGA Republican, who supports unions". These parties have to work for my vote and cannot count on my vote.. In case, you think someone saying the things I have is somehow anti-Trump. If I am, it's only because it makes sense to be so.

cheeze 4y ago

China does it just fine

intothemild 4y ago

Especially when companies are looking to move their manufacturing from China... India just shot itself in the foot

throwoutway 4y ago
China has been regulating encryption and requiring escrow on businesses and breaking encryption for years

ahoy93 4y ago

I remember an IETF meeting where this was discussed and turned down. This was 25+ years ago, and it seems to pop up again and again. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp200.html https://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp/bcp200.html

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

sneak 4y ago

I mean, this is how the USA works. It is widely speculated that the USG will retaliate against Apple for shipping true end-to-end encryption software that does not enable surveillance unless they (Apple) do some sort of clientside scanning. This seems to indicate that Apple's 1A rights to publish software are being infringed. Presently all large/webscale messengers in the USA (iMessage, WhatsApp, etc) all have backdoors in the e2ee that allow the FBI et al to access message content at will (often without a warrant or probable cause).

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

ajsnigrutin 4y ago

Many countries tried this, even the ones we consider the "modern world" (like france, more than once). Some even prohibited export of encryption, so they could more easily decrypt foreign traffic (usa). Some protocols were even designed with "alternative" encryption, intentionally weakened (GSM).

m463 4y ago

unfortunately, there are things they could do without "turning over encryption keys". Scanning for keywords, doing content id on images, all kinds of other stuff that would not "turn over encryption keys". I suspect other services do these things for advertising keywords, and to prevent objectionable images from being sent.