4 ms·

Do you think they are using the message archiving version so that they can meet organizational message retention requirements? Maybe they are using signal to e

Do you think they are using the message archiving version so that they can meet organizational message retention requirements? Maybe they are using signal to ensure they have e2e encrypted messaging on their devices?

crooked-v 1y ago
There are already government e2e apps. The only reason to use something else is to have selective auto-deletion and/or to use personal devices for official classified data.
- ceejayoz 1y ago
  Another reason: all of the folks on that group chat have legitimate reasons to have contacts on their phone that would be outside government apps. Foreign leadership. Journalists. Etc. Signal is likely to be one of the main ways of communicating with those.
  - wmf 1y ago
    Using separate apps for government and external communication might have prevented the recent scandal.
    - snovv_crash 1y ago
      It wouldn't actually. The contact in his phone (incorrectly added by Apple AI from a forwarded email) would be the same regardless which app he was using. Instead, Signal (and this forked version) would have to do its own independent contact management, maybe based on in-person scanning of QR codes plus web-of-trust.
      - radlad 1y ago
        The contact (a journalist) wouldn't be reachable on a government messaging app.
      - voytec 1y ago
        Signal does have its own contacts management and doesn't have to be allowed access to OS-native contacts.
        rkomorn 1y ago
        If only it would a- not ask you to access your contacts and b- accept when you say no instead of saying "we'll ask again later" (and then, indeed, asking again later).
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- Mbwagava 1y ago
  Do you have the link to this alleged government-produced e2e software so we can inspect ourselves? I realize they have an incentive to appear incompetent, but surely there must be evidence (further than your testimony) of such gossip popping up somewhere
  - _djo_ 1y ago
    There are not just government e2e apps, but government-provided and customised smartphones specifically for them, like the DMCC-S programme. [0] Some of the apps are listed in that brochure. There's no excuse for using Signal on personal devices for classified conversations. [0] https://www.disa.mil/~/media/files/disa/fact-sheets/dmcc-s.pdf https://www.disa.mil/~/media/files/disa/fact-sheets/dmcc-s.p...
    - Mbwagava 1y ago
      Are the apps usable? The jargon seems intentionally impenetrable. The editor of that document should be shot every time they used an acronym. Like i get the DOD is a profitable dick to suck but this is just embarrassing for a document intended for the public. Anyway can you link the source? That's presumably the useful half. The marketing bit doesn't add anything.
      - _djo_ 1y ago
        I don't care how usable they are, this is the DoD and NSA-approved mechanism for conducting classified conversations and viewing classified data on mobile devices. The adversaries here are other countries who are very good at what they do, security is far more important than convenience. As for further research, there's plenty online about his programme and these devices. Feel free to Google it yourself. You're asking to be spoonfed.
jrochkind1 1y ago
So, I think it's pretty straighforward. First, they are not supposed to use personal devices for classified conversations. But they are allowed to use ordinary consumer devices for non-classified conversations. That even if not classified, they still might want to be secure -- or to communicate with other people who prefer signal. But those conversations need to be archived, per government policy. So on their ordinary consumer devices have a version of Signal on it that archives, to meet ordinary government policies. This is all ordinary, and I believe probably the previosu administraiton had the same thing. The only non-ordinary thing is that they insisted on using the consumer devices for classified conversations even though it violates policy, so just use the 'best' app on there for that. Which is not good enough, because you are not supposed to be having conversations including classified material on ordinary consumer devices, because they are not secure enough.

crooked-v 1y ago

There are already government e2e apps. The only reason to use something else is to have selective auto-deletion and/or to use personal devices for official classified data.

ceejayoz 1y ago
Another reason: all of the folks on that group chat have legitimate reasons to have contacts on their phone that would be outside government apps. Foreign leadership. Journalists. Etc. Signal is likely to be one of the main ways of communicating with those.
- wmf 1y ago
  Using separate apps for government and external communication might have prevented the recent scandal.
  - snovv_crash 1y ago
    It wouldn't actually. The contact in his phone (incorrectly added by Apple AI from a forwarded email) would be the same regardless which app he was using. Instead, Signal (and this forked version) would have to do its own independent contact management, maybe based on in-person scanning of QR codes plus web-of-trust.
    - radlad 1y ago
      The contact (a journalist) wouldn't be reachable on a government messaging app.
    - voytec 1y ago
      Signal does have its own contacts management and doesn't have to be allowed access to OS-native contacts.
      - rkomorn 1y ago
        If only it would a- not ask you to access your contacts and b- accept when you say no instead of saying "we'll ask again later" (and then, indeed, asking again later).
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
Mbwagava 1y ago
Do you have the link to this alleged government-produced e2e software so we can inspect ourselves? I realize they have an incentive to appear incompetent, but surely there must be evidence (further than your testimony) of such gossip popping up somewhere
- _djo_ 1y ago
  There are not just government e2e apps, but government-provided and customised smartphones specifically for them, like the DMCC-S programme. [0] Some of the apps are listed in that brochure. There's no excuse for using Signal on personal devices for classified conversations. [0] https://www.disa.mil/~/media/files/disa/fact-sheets/dmcc-s.pdf https://www.disa.mil/~/media/files/disa/fact-sheets/dmcc-s.p...
  - Mbwagava 1y ago
    Are the apps usable? The jargon seems intentionally impenetrable. The editor of that document should be shot every time they used an acronym. Like i get the DOD is a profitable dick to suck but this is just embarrassing for a document intended for the public. Anyway can you link the source? That's presumably the useful half. The marketing bit doesn't add anything.
    - _djo_ 1y ago
      I don't care how usable they are, this is the DoD and NSA-approved mechanism for conducting classified conversations and viewing classified data on mobile devices. The adversaries here are other countries who are very good at what they do, security is far more important than convenience. As for further research, there's plenty online about his programme and these devices. Feel free to Google it yourself. You're asking to be spoonfed.

jrochkind1 1y ago

So, I think it's pretty straighforward. First, they are not supposed to use personal devices for classified conversations. But they are allowed to use ordinary consumer devices for non-classified conversations. That even if not classified, they still might want to be secure -- or to communicate with other people who prefer signal. But those conversations need to be archived, per government policy. So on their ordinary consumer devices have a version of Signal on it that archives, to meet ordinary government policies. This is all ordinary, and I believe probably the previosu administraiton had the same thing. The only non-ordinary thing is that they insisted on using the consumer devices for classified conversations even though it violates policy, so just use the 'best' app on there for that. Which is not good enough, because you are not supposed to be having conversations including classified material on ordinary consumer devices, because they are not secure enough.