5 ms·

Don't care. They can paint that thing in whatever color they want. I'm still not using a messenger with an algorithm developed next door to the NSA headquarter

Don't care. They can paint that thing in whatever color they want. I'm still not using a messenger with an algorithm developed next door to the NSA headquarters.

willsmith72 4y ago
You think the alternative messaging apps are any better?
- nunobrito 4y ago
  Well.. Signal was literally sponsored by the CIA from the beginning. OTF gave Signal 3 million USD: https://www.opentech.fund/results/supported-projects/open-whisper-systems/ https://www.opentech.fund/results/supported-projects/open-wh... The OTF was created in 2012 as a pilot program of Radio Free Asia (RFA), an asset of US Agency for Global Media (USAGM)/CIA, which is in turn funded by US Congress. The algorithm for signal/whisper was developed next door to the NSA headquarters in Hawaii. All of this is public information at the moment. Don't know if ALL OTHER messaging apps are better, but would at least prefer a messenger not sponsored/blessed by well-known spy agencies.
  - willsmith72 4y ago
    What are your alternatives? The signal protocol is basically the gold-standard. If the NSA has a backdoor (and yes, they might), I don't know of any other protocols that wouldn't.
    - nunobrito 4y ago
      "gold-standard", lol. Provide a source for that claim. So far you have provided zero evidence for your statements and yet demand others for them. Good approach.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
barbs 4y ago
Not sure I understand. My impression was that the end-to-end encryption algorithm was probably the most secure thing about Signal, allowing strong encryption between sender and recipient without relying on trust of the central server. Regardless of where or how it was developed, it's open-source.
- nunobrito 4y ago
  99.9% of the algorithms are open source, that is still no reason for them to be trusted since it takes years and years (sometimes decades) until exploits included by design are revealed: https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4718694/how-far-did-the-nsa-go-to-weaken-cryptography-standards https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4718694/how-far-did-the-n... Trivia: What percentage of open source end-to-end encryption algorithms were developed by coincidence next door to the NSA headquarters?
  - barbs 4y ago
    Reading into that article, it looks like the NSA made a random-number generation algorithm standard, but upon inspection by cryptographers it was seen to be suspect due to its unclear origin of particular constants, and this was discovered as soon as the standards were published [0]. It was also slow compared to other standards, and as a result it was never widely adopted. By contrast, I can't find any significant security criticisms about Signal's double-ratchet algorithm, nor anything that would suggest that some sort of bad actor is pushing it to become standard. It seems to me like it was widely adopted because it's a solid end-to-end encryption algorithm. I also couldn't find where the algorithm was developed. If you have any sources for this I'd be glad to read it. [0] https://www.wired.com/2007/11/securitymatters-1115/ https://www.wired.com/2007/11/securitymatters-1115/

Don't care. They can paint that thing in whatever color they want. I'm still not using a messenger with an algorithm developed next door to the NSA headquarters.

willsmith72 4y ago

You think the alternative messaging apps are any better?

nunobrito 4y ago
Well.. Signal was literally sponsored by the CIA from the beginning. OTF gave Signal 3 million USD: https://www.opentech.fund/results/supported-projects/open-whisper-systems/ https://www.opentech.fund/results/supported-projects/open-wh... The OTF was created in 2012 as a pilot program of Radio Free Asia (RFA), an asset of US Agency for Global Media (USAGM)/CIA, which is in turn funded by US Congress. The algorithm for signal/whisper was developed next door to the NSA headquarters in Hawaii. All of this is public information at the moment. Don't know if ALL OTHER messaging apps are better, but would at least prefer a messenger not sponsored/blessed by well-known spy agencies.
- willsmith72 4y ago
  What are your alternatives? The signal protocol is basically the gold-standard. If the NSA has a backdoor (and yes, they might), I don't know of any other protocols that wouldn't.
  - nunobrito 4y ago
    "gold-standard", lol. Provide a source for that claim. So far you have provided zero evidence for your statements and yet demand others for them. Good approach.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

barbs 4y ago

Not sure I understand. My impression was that the end-to-end encryption algorithm was probably the most secure thing about Signal, allowing strong encryption between sender and recipient without relying on trust of the central server. Regardless of where or how it was developed, it's open-source.

nunobrito 4y ago
99.9% of the algorithms are open source, that is still no reason for them to be trusted since it takes years and years (sometimes decades) until exploits included by design are revealed: https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4718694/how-far-did-the-nsa-go-to-weaken-cryptography-standards https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4718694/how-far-did-the-n... Trivia: What percentage of open source end-to-end encryption algorithms were developed by coincidence next door to the NSA headquarters?
- barbs 4y ago
  Reading into that article, it looks like the NSA made a random-number generation algorithm standard, but upon inspection by cryptographers it was seen to be suspect due to its unclear origin of particular constants, and this was discovered as soon as the standards were published [0]. It was also slow compared to other standards, and as a result it was never widely adopted. By contrast, I can't find any significant security criticisms about Signal's double-ratchet algorithm, nor anything that would suggest that some sort of bad actor is pushing it to become standard. It seems to me like it was widely adopted because it's a solid end-to-end encryption algorithm. I also couldn't find where the algorithm was developed. If you have any sources for this I'd be glad to read it. [0] https://www.wired.com/2007/11/securitymatters-1115/ https://www.wired.com/2007/11/securitymatters-1115/