5 ms·

Never really understood the privacy argument for hiding (or disconnecting) your phone number in a User-User "texting" type application. I suppose if Signal were

Never really understood the privacy argument for hiding (or disconnecting) your phone number in a User-User "texting" type application. I suppose if Signal were linking my identity across a bunch of platforms I'd be worried, but their privacy policy is pretty aggressive so I'm not really worried about that. Indeed the additional friction for scammers is a benefit to me. Telegram is a morass of dodgy group chats and spam, Signal is miles better for the things I value in a messaging service (encrypted texting and group chatting with people I already know in the real world).

rt4mn 3y ago
For a lot of people, signal is not simply a User-User "texting" type application, but much more akin to slack or discord or matrix. Many, Many reporters put their signal number in twitter bio seeking tips. Many activists (including me) use signal group chats to organize volenteers and staff, and publicly share room links. In other words, we have to either share our number publicly or buy a burner phone number if we want people to interact with us on signal.
- ColoursofOSINT 3y ago
  Absolutely, not to mention if you ever switch numbers you have to change the signal information. For me, its fine for verification, but I want an identifier I ever have to change.
- tech_ken 3y ago
  Makes sense, definitely if anonymity from conversation partners is desired then I can see how Signal's model falls short of your needs. I've also used Signal in the past for activist group chats, but in those cases my primary risk vector has been having messages read by someone outside of the group, people typically join those after being referred by someone they met face-to-face. I suppose there's always the risk of a wrecker slipping in, and having more layers of anonymity could reduce that downside risk. Hopefully this username approach is able to address your needs better! I really like the tool so would be stoked to see it cover additional use cases.
  - codedokode 3y ago
    This is still bad, as any of them sees all the phones of members of the group. In Telegram you can hide your number.
    - tech_ken 3y ago
      Presumably if they introduced usernames they would also allow you to hide your number in a chat? edit: I think I misunderstood you. Yes, it is the case that everyone in the chat has access to everyone else's ID, however in my use-cases group members have already been vetted before joining the group, I don't participate in publicly accessible Signal chats or use it to communicate with true strangers.
teekert 3y ago
Was gonna say: Telegram has a lot of spam and strange people starting to talk to me, scammers I suppose. Never had that on Signal.
codedokode 3y ago
With WhatsApp or Signal, if you want to talk to a stranger (e.g. if selling something) you have to share your real number, while in Telegram you can share just a username.
- tech_ken 3y ago
  > selling something Whatcha selling :) To coordinate my own anonymous commodity transactions I just use gpg to encrypt a .txt which can be delivered in all sorts of anonymous ways. I can't say that I transact anonymously too frequently though, so the additional friction with this method isn't especially onerous.
  - transcriptase 3y ago
    Post something like a prom dress for sale online and observe the messages you get from weird perverted men. Then ask yourself if they should have a sellers real phone number.
    - tech_ken 3y ago
      But why not just use an email address or something for that case? I get how it would be ideal (and myself desire) to have one messaging tool which works in all cases, but it doesn't seem like a massive failure specifically of Signal to not work for this usage. Certainly not one large enough to warrant the torrent of comments I see any time Signal gets mentioned on HN
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    I regularly talk to Chinese vendors selling robot parts who want to talk over WhatsApp. This is ultimately fine for me but it’s an example of a scenario where I don’t really want to give anything more personal than necessary.
    - tech_ken 3y ago
      Sure that makes sense to me, however I will say that if I was a vendor selling stuff internationally I probably would want (and even require, depending on export controls) some level of de-anonymization on the buyer's part. Presumably at the very least you need to provide a shipping address to receive the goods, which is no less identifying or difficult to spoof than a phone number.

rt4mn 3y ago

For a lot of people, signal is not simply a User-User "texting" type application, but much more akin to slack or discord or matrix. Many, Many reporters put their signal number in twitter bio seeking tips. Many activists (including me) use signal group chats to organize volenteers and staff, and publicly share room links. In other words, we have to either share our number publicly or buy a burner phone number if we want people to interact with us on signal.

ColoursofOSINT 3y ago
Absolutely, not to mention if you ever switch numbers you have to change the signal information. For me, its fine for verification, but I want an identifier I ever have to change.
tech_ken 3y ago
Makes sense, definitely if anonymity from conversation partners is desired then I can see how Signal's model falls short of your needs. I've also used Signal in the past for activist group chats, but in those cases my primary risk vector has been having messages read by someone outside of the group, people typically join those after being referred by someone they met face-to-face. I suppose there's always the risk of a wrecker slipping in, and having more layers of anonymity could reduce that downside risk. Hopefully this username approach is able to address your needs better! I really like the tool so would be stoked to see it cover additional use cases.
- codedokode 3y ago
  This is still bad, as any of them sees all the phones of members of the group. In Telegram you can hide your number.
  - tech_ken 3y ago
    Presumably if they introduced usernames they would also allow you to hide your number in a chat? edit: I think I misunderstood you. Yes, it is the case that everyone in the chat has access to everyone else's ID, however in my use-cases group members have already been vetted before joining the group, I don't participate in publicly accessible Signal chats or use it to communicate with true strangers.

teekert 3y ago

Was gonna say: Telegram has a lot of spam and strange people starting to talk to me, scammers I suppose. Never had that on Signal.

codedokode 3y ago

With WhatsApp or Signal, if you want to talk to a stranger (e.g. if selling something) you have to share your real number, while in Telegram you can share just a username.

tech_ken 3y ago
> selling something Whatcha selling :) To coordinate my own anonymous commodity transactions I just use gpg to encrypt a .txt which can be delivered in all sorts of anonymous ways. I can't say that I transact anonymously too frequently though, so the additional friction with this method isn't especially onerous.
- transcriptase 3y ago
  Post something like a prom dress for sale online and observe the messages you get from weird perverted men. Then ask yourself if they should have a sellers real phone number.
  - tech_ken 3y ago
    But why not just use an email address or something for that case? I get how it would be ideal (and myself desire) to have one messaging tool which works in all cases, but it doesn't seem like a massive failure specifically of Signal to not work for this usage. Certainly not one large enough to warrant the torrent of comments I see any time Signal gets mentioned on HN
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  I regularly talk to Chinese vendors selling robot parts who want to talk over WhatsApp. This is ultimately fine for me but it’s an example of a scenario where I don’t really want to give anything more personal than necessary.
  - tech_ken 3y ago
    Sure that makes sense to me, however I will say that if I was a vendor selling stuff internationally I probably would want (and even require, depending on export controls) some level of de-anonymization on the buyer's part. Presumably at the very least you need to provide a shipping address to receive the goods, which is no less identifying or difficult to spoof than a phone number.