i’ve just seen a comment in a post, in this very community, saying people trust signal because of missinformation (from what i could undertand).
if this is true, then i have a few questions:
-what menssaging app should i use for secure communications? i need an app that balances simplicity and security.
-how to explain it to my friends who use signal because i recomended?
-what this means for other apps in general?
You must log in or # to comment.
It’s fine as long as you don’t do something silly like invite a journalist to your top secret government group chat.
Or use a third party client that doesn’t have as much scrutiny on the source code and will Leak your message s
man imagine trusting in an israeli signal fork lmao
Would you say Molly is big/trustworthy enough for this to be negligible, or is it a huge risk?
Molly basically is a fork of the signal client that switches out some notification based things (such as your notifications going through fcm and such) and instead lets you use unifiedpush and/or a molly websocket. Apart from this they’re both the same. Molly uses signal’s codebase.
Molly also supports full database encryption and replaces all proprietary blobs in signal iirc
Given what you’ve said, Signal is still what you want and is good for it.
There are two main issues people have with Signal:
First is that it requires a phone number to sign up. That makes some people who want it to be truly anonymous unhappy. It’s not meant to be anonymous, though. It’s meant to be private. Those aren’t the same thing.
Second is that it runs on AWS. This isn’t a problem in the sense that it’s possible for it to still retain privacy while running on AWS. Some people don’t like it because they view the dependence on the infrastructure of an American company to be a risk to availability. They also believe that it would exacerbate a security flaw if one were found.
Personally, I know these risks and still find it to be the best balance between privacy, security, and ease of use.
And what about suspicion of intrusions in some accounts of european imlrtznts poeple by the FSB recently ?
I don’t know if it’s a social ingeneering
But now, i think “good enough” attitude is not the good idéal, we are not in 2000’ it’s finish…
Another app exists :
Session
simpleX
Anonymous messenger
Briar
Twinme
But it’ always better to use a verified and audited app, need to have a safe team
The usual conspiracy theory is that Signal is funded by the CIA and therefore a honey pot.
what menssaging app should i use for secure communications? i need an app that balances simplicity and security.
Signal. I can do almost everything that i.e. WhatsApp or Telegram offer, is as easy to use as those and the client is verifiably encrypted and secure.
how to explain it to my friends who use signal because i recomended?
Explain what exactly? Why they should use it?
- It offers the same functionality as other messengers while being verifiably secure and encrypted.
- Signal collects only three datapoints of users
- Date of registration
- Date of last connection to the server
- Your encrypted backups if you enable cloud backups
- Compare that to messengers such as WhatsApp and Telegram where it is not clear which information they collect, whether they store it in an encrypted format or not or who they share it with.
- In the case of WhatsApp it is at least the US government as required by the Cloud Act.
- In case of Telegram the data is unencrypted by default and cooperation with various governments has been reported.
what this means for other apps in general?
Please clarify the question.
the part of the “conspiracy theory” about CIA funding is completely true: signal proudly say they get funding from the OTF, which at the time signal started was a subsidiary of Radio Free Asia, which started out as an open CIA project (before being relaunched as clearly still a CIA project but without the official acknowledgement).
I’m 50:50 on whether signal is a literal honeypot, but even if not it seems pretty likely that the US government wouldn’t have funded an app that could be used by people breaking its laws - let alone people actively organizing against it (foreign spies, domestic revolutionaries and insurrectionists) unless they were getting something pretty big in return.
In return they get an actually secure messing app they can use without having to support it themselves. Which is pretty big.
The epstein files have proven that conspiracy theories are true. Of course powerful gangsters conspire. We already knew that since forever.
Ok, because the thing, that everybody knew turned out to be true, every conspiracy theory is valid now?
I guess you should go visit the Nazis in New Swabia and discuss this revelation with them.
Perfect is the enemy of good. Moving to Signal would be way better than getting analysis paralysis and staying with Whatsapp.
deleted by creator
The actual quote is: “Perfect is the enemy of good enough.”
Source?
There is none. Theres like 0.1% of people who complain about it who have a valid point.
And those points are always meaningless in light of the alternative’s drawbacks.
Agreed. I would add that most detractors don’t understand what a threat model is and want a perfect solution, for no cost, and easy to use. Something which is impossible.
Even the alternatives like Briar acknowledge on their FAQ that Signal has pros
Signal does have your phone number, which is a problem.
On the other hand, the only information linked to that phone number is, “the person with this phone number uses signal”. AFAIK your phone number is not linked to your contacts, your message content, etc.
So in practice, the fact that Signal has your phone number is probably only a problem insofar as you don’t want anybody to know that you use Signal.
But to be fair, why have that issue if you don’t have to. Signal is actually good, still, but there are even better alternatives.
Signal is actually good, still, but there are even better alternatives.
… Would you care to list some of these alternatives and how they are better?
Every alternative I’ve looked at has some major drawbacks that would prevent me from getting any of my friends to move. Having to selfhost my own chat service isn’t really a positive in my mind due to the maintenance required and the higher possibility of outages.
list some of these alternatives
Probably the ones you’re already thinking of (SimpleX, Session, XMPP).
how they are better?
They’re better in terms of privacy. When I said they’re better, I mean specifically in terms of privacy.
Of course they’re less convenient, as you’re alluding to.
Signal gets me all the privacy I need. I don’t care if they know my phone number uses Signal, I don’t use it as anonymous chat, I use it with friends and family.
As others in this post have said, Signal handles privacy perfectly fine, it does not provide anonymity.Unlike several other users here, I actually view Signal’s contact discoverability as a feature, not a security flaw. All it means is if someone I know installs Signal, they can easily send me a message without a complicated back and forth through some other medium.
I myself said “Signal is actually good”, so there’s no need to argue with me about it.
Nevertheless:
I actually view Signal’s contact discoverability as a feature, not a security flaw
Of course it can be both. Many things are both features in one domain, and flaws in another domain. Obviously it’s a feature or else they wouldn’t have purposely developed it.
PRODUCT PITCH: Hey everyone, I have a great idea for a secure / private messaging service.
It’s hosted in the US, subject to its pervasive spying laws including national security letters.
Also I need all your phone numbers.
Also no you can’t host this yourself, I run the only server.
Everyone who uses signal and supports it, is falling for this pitch.
There is no problem
Like many said, signal is centralised and requires a phone number.
Meaning it’s not anonymous and the server owners can technically sell your metadata, not the content of the messages but who talks to who, what time, the length of the chat/call etc.
Either-way having to use a phone number to register an account, for me is not acceptable for several reasons besides privacy and metadata.
On top of that, the server side of signal isn’t free software (as in freedom), which means that the whole program requires non-free (as in freedom not beer) network services in order to work. Which isn’t acceptable for free software advocates.
Alternatives:
Simplex: If you don’t require voice calls there are more options available there are many text messages, but very few support calls, which for me is a critical feature.
In theory Simplex is the best, it’s e2ee, quantum resistant, each chat (message queue) is it’s own “account”, each “account” is just a private key, and you can switch servers with the tap of a bottom, it also supports private routing, which from what I understand is like some sort of onion routing between simplex servers.
Hosting your own server is also extremely easy, (tho note that running your own server can actually be detrimental to privacy depending on your threat model), supports calls, group chats and all the features I would ever need.
Unfortunately at least for me and my contacts, SimpleX it’s terribly buggy, specially on phone, literally tonight I missed the opportunity to be with a friend because I only saw the message one hour late.
Very often messages just stop being received until the app is restarted, usually I have my friend send me a message via other (centralised) app in order to warn me that he messaged me, I also do the same for him. After restarting the app it usually works fine for a while until it does it again. And needs restarting again.
On top of it, it’s taking more and more time to get the first message when in background even during normal operation, tho I blame Samsung for this one and not Simplex, and understand that Simplex doesn’t use push notifications for improved privacy, but it has become a real problem, what used to take 5 minutes now sometimes takes more than half an hour. Maybe my phone is overloaded, idk.
Calls could be improved too, takes several tries for it to actually work, and it doesn’t help when the other person calls me back and I call them at the same time.
On top of it, the volume of a call seems very quiet compared to a normal phone call and it’s very hard to hear the other person, I’m guessing a simple compressor DSP could fix this.
Unfortunately also has been news of Simplex planning to enshittify the app with cryptocurrency, something that I politically and morally oppose.
Session:
I’ve used it for a month years ago, before I knew about SimpleX, whatever technical merits it may or may not have, (and from what I understand it’s privacy is still below SimpleX) it relies on some cryptocurrency network in the background, so I won’t use it. Self-hosting it also seemed to me no easy task, but I could be wrong.
Jami:
Never got it to work.
Matrix:
I haven’t tried Matrix yet, I think I read long ago that calls aren’t e2ee tho that may have changed now. I also read that Matrix leaks a lot of metadata which can be a problem. Maybe not if you self-host, but self-hosting comes with it’s own privacy problems. Maybe I should research it again and try to self-host it and see how it goes.
So as bad as Signal is, I can’t give you a working alternative, I put all with Simplex despite all the bugs but I don’t think most people are willing to go though it, however if you (and your contacts) have a high end phones maybe it works better. But it’s not something I can recommend.
Just looked at Session, and holy shit is that a massive downside…
From their own whitepaper:
Through the integration of a blockchain network, Session adds a financial requirement for anyone wishing to host a server on the network, and thus participate in Session’s message storage and routing architecture.
So you have to pay to self-host, and that’s somehow an upside???
This staking system provides a defence against Sybil attacks by limiting attackers based on the amount of financial resources they have available.
Which is a fine explanation in a world where everyone has a relatively equal amount of wealth. This is the epitome of dunning-kruger economics: a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Firstly, the need for attackers to buy or control Session Tokens to run Session Nodes creates a market feedback loop which increases the cost of acquiring sufficient tokens to run large portions of the network. That is, as the attacker buys or acquires more tokens and stakes them, removing them from the circulating supply, the supply of the Session Token is decreased while the demand from the attacker must be sustained. This causes the price of any remaining Session Tokens to increase, creating an increasing price feedback loop which correlates with the scale of the attack
So the more nodes a single entity holds, the harder it becomes for other entities to buy nodes and break the monopoly? Did you take 3 seconds to think this through???
Secondly, the staking system binds an attacker to their stake, meaning if they are found to be performing active attacks, the underlying value of their stake is likely to decline as users lose trust in the protocol, or could be slashed by the network, increasing the sunk cost for the attacker.
“Assuming every user is a perfectly rational actor, malicious actors would be shunned. This is somehow due to the economic incentive, and not just how humans operate when they’re assumed to be perfectly rational.”
Also: malicious actors when they find out they might lose their money if they get caught: “welp, I better not do that then. Thanks laissez-faire capitalism!”
Jesus christ fucked on a pike, these dipshits really drank the crypto kool-aid, huh?
Matrix very recently has had e2ee calling since at least last april
I don’t host a server currently, so I can’t fully recommend it without knowledge of the backend, but i’m liking the experience as a user
In regards to Signal, this is largely not true. Sealed sender has been signal’s metadata hiding protection for like 6 years or something. The only information signal has is your phone number, your account creation time, and the last time you contacted their servers.
They also have a server implementation on github, so it seems to be open source to me. (I could be missing something though)
You are right though, that it uses centralized servers and requires a phone number, which are sticking points for a lot of people.
Give me ssh access to their centralized server so I can verify this “sealed sender” idea is working.
Otherwise this is a “trust me bro” claim.
This doesn’t really make sense to me, what do you mean? Client-side you do different computation for sealed sender delivery/receipt. What’s your normal standard of trust that a hosted, open source project is running the same code that they’ve made public?
I think if they store any metadata that we don’t know about, the lie runs very very deep, like to conspiracy theory levels that don’t really make sense for a registered nonprofit: https://signal.org/bigbrother/
What’s your normal standard of trust that a hosted, open source project is running the same code that they’ve made public?
Its a centralized service, you have no idea what code they’re running. You can’t host your own.
Also they went a whole year one time without publishing any server code updates until they got a lot of backlash for it. Still, since its centralized, it can’t be trusted to be running what they say they are.
What about Delta Chat?
Delta Chat doesn’t support calls, same with Briar so I haven’t tried them since calls are as important as messages for me.
They do support it (Settings -> Advanced ->enable Debug calls or wait a few days for the latest release). Also chatmail servers provide turn/stun for calls if they couldn’t established as p2p.
Interesting, didn’t know this, nice, may be a gamechanger, but I couldn’t find information on either calls are e2ee or not.
Yes, p2p or via turn server, always encrypted the same way as messages.
Full topic is here: https://support.delta.chat/t/help-testing-upcoming-delta-chat-release-with-calls/4220
The latest version also got much nicer calls interface: https://deltachat.github.io/deltachat-android/CHANGELOG.html#v2460
Signal is alright IMO.
There is no perfect service. Thats why smarter people than me analyze this and talk about it: https://www.messenger-matrix.de/messenger-matrix-en.html
I think deltachat is pretty cool. Decentralised, open source and quite easy to use and setup.For me it is something for friends willing to try out new stuff and as a fallback when signal fails.
Delta chat is the best. Especially with webxdc’s.
Did you ask the commenter what the issue was? Seems like the logical place to start.
You’d think so, but sometimes they just angrily rant with no clear point or references.
But that would mean that you shouldnt accept their claim, regardless of how conceivable the claim might appear to be. Otherwise, we loose our minds to common sense.
i agree with everything you said about signal, but i’m uncomfortable with a lot of the alternatives. a cryptographer i follow has written about a couple of these: xmpp, matrix three or four times (linked in the introduction to the post), others
Look at Delta chat.
Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Signal is easy to use, and that is what really protects millions of people. Otherwise, they would never use a complex or decentralized alternative.
Something being easy to use has nothing to do with privacy or security. Apple, just like signal, also sold it’s products as secure, yet they also were forwarding all communications to the US government as part of the prism program.
Signal is not a stepping stone, it’s a honey pot. Best to avoid US services that require your identity entirely.
SimpleX Chat is an actual privacy focused app that’s easy to use and doesn’t harvest your phone number like Signal does https://simplex.chat/
I’m put off by the centralized server. I’d want to self host without having to build a special client, something like nextcloud. That the company chose to prevent that gives me a bad impression. So I haven’t been using it so far.
I’ve played with GNU Jami a little but it was flaky when I tried it last year. Maybe it’s better now.
You can’t have it both ways. It’s hard enough to get people to switch to signal, or least also use it next to other messengers. Now imagine they’d have to connect to multiple servers to talk to multiple people. Possibly everyone connection details. Even if that’s done in the background, you have to somehow get the connection registered once, discovered if you will.
Anything and everything you send through their server is end-to-end encrypted. Some people hate on the phone number being required to create an account, but it’s also the reason it works at all: anyone in your contacts who also has signal you can talk to. Phone numbers are an international standard. If course this also has downsides…
Finally what you’re asking for exists. NextCloud has “talk”. Which is essentially a messenger app, it’s built in. Go use it. I have a NextCloud instance and I don’t use it either. What’s the point of having an app I can only use to talk with people so close to me that they’re in my NextCloud with an account already?
You can’t have it both ways.
Of course I can. Jitsi Meet lets you do it both ways. I don’t know if Nextcloud has an official hosted server but they could if they wanted. I use it self-hosted and it works, the Talk app is just not very good. Jami uses a DHT instead of a centralized server which is another approach, though it might be part of its flakiness. Linphone (a regular VOIP client, not a secure chat thing) is set up by default to point to Linphone’s own SIP servers but you can change that in Settings. No reason Signal can’t do similar. Heck, even Lemmy works that way (you choose your server).
Signal is simply being evil and your defending them is unconvincing. I could opt to self-host Signal and build a special client for my users, at the cost of hassle for everyone but no serious technical drawbacks. Signal chooses to create that hassle because they want to funnel users through their servers, not incidentally collecting metadata about ALL the user conversations.
There’s actually a configurable Signal client called Amanda or something like that, though I haven’t tried it. Someone here mentioned it last time this came up.
Also, Signal’s own client isn’t on F-droid, which raises more potential questions. I haven’t cared enough to look into it.
Added: oh re Nextcloud, I see what you mean, account creation is an obstacle, though that could be handled like Hipchat used to. You could generate a randomized URL to invite someone to your private chat without their needing an account. Nextcloud has that too, though just for file access, not for chat for some reason. Come to think of it, Signal could also work that way: it shouldn’t need accounts at all.
When I’ve invited people to my Nextcloud I’ve just enrolled the account for them myself and told them “please log in with username X password Y”.
I’ll start by saying that i don’t use signal.
if this is true
There are some concerns that other people in the comments explained. It’s up to you to decide if the trade off is good enough for you. There’s no silver bullet for this.
-what menssaging app should i use for secure communications? i need an app that balances simplicity and security.
Signal is ok. Same as matrix, delta chat, xmpp, simplex. Avoid telegram, messenger, whatsapp, instagram, snapshat, max…
-how to explain it to my friends who use signal because i recomended?
Most people mess up the concepts of anonymity with privacy.
-what this means for other apps in general?
There’s no silver bullet. All the apps have ups and downs. Most people don’t realize that if a state actor (I’m not talking about police but for example NSA, CIA, mossad, mi6) is after you, they will get you. Usually from a side channel, or from some stupid mistake you made years ago.
