Reading the comments here I believe there is one detail that needs to be mentioned. Many seem to uphold the opinion that, while the feature is not for them, the

Reading the comments here I believe there is one detail that needs to be mentioned. Many seem to uphold the opinion that, while the feature is not for them, they aren't mad about it as they feel it brings Signal closer to the masses and is hence a good thing. One key aspect to consider, however, is the fact that at the end of the day the feature requires code in order to work. Code can contain flaws. When working in encryption it's usually the less code the better, as it limits the attack surface. It begs the question, just like with the introduction of their payments feature, whether the additional amount of code, which could realistically introduce new flaws, is justified by the benefit it brings to a platform that's main focus is private, encrypted communication? To put it differently: Will citizens, dissidents and journalists in authoritarian regimes be benefitting enough from this feature to justify the additional attack surface its code has introduced?