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?

  • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s fine as long as you don’t do something silly like invite a journalist to your top secret government group chat.

  • kn33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

  • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

  • glitching@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    not to shit on you specifically but I see this over and over, folks asking how to be “secure”. secure against what?

    if you’re into this, you need to set up a “threat model” i.e. what are your threat vectors and then you build your defenses against that model. a defense against blanket surveillance doesn’t handle targeted threats. a successful defense against your government doesn’t preclude other nation-state actors getting at you.

    like, if your threat vector is e.g. your SO “inspecting” your phone, you set up a passcode and you’re safe against that threat. but, if there’s a toddler going around smashing stuff, your defense isn’t valid. defense against that vector is placing your phone high up. but that defense isn’t effective against SO.

    I am sure any messenger recommended here can be successfully red-teamed, be it design flaws, operator error, the famous wrench comic, or whathaveyou. but that doesn’t mean it’s ineffective in your specific case.

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • a Kendrick fan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Being tied to US infrastructure isn’t a valid concern?

      What then is the difference between it and Whatsapp? Both claim to use the Signal secure protocol but you can never confirm that since their codebases are closed source and proprietary.

    • racoon@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Even the alternatives like Briar acknowledge on their FAQ that Signal has pros

      • monovergent@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Would love to use SimpleX too, but the plan fell apart while trying to use it with family. Surprisingly many people fail to grasp the concept of anything other than a phone number, social media profile, or email address. It fell apart among my more tech-savvy friends because we missed calls and had delayed notifications despite SimpleX eating through the battery like no other messaging app.

        No doubt, SimpleX is the concept of a messaging app done right and could be better than any other. It’s just the implementation that needs work. But I’d be happy to hear if there’s any optimizations I could try and revisit it.

      • Schlemmy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        My contact coulds find me by phone number. I changes my status on WhatsApp and half of the regular contacts decided to use Signal. If I want to use SimpleX I would have to invite them all and just hope they’ll adopt.

        I don’t need my phone number to be private. I want my communication to be private.

  • drayva@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    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.

    • CandleTiger@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well, it’s 100% linked to your contacts in one way or another because when you install it Signal will happily alert you to which ones of your contacts are already using Signal. I can’t see how they could manage that without slurping up your contact information.

      • drayva@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        AFAIK the client slurps up your contacts, but the E2E encryption ensures that the Signal server cannot actually see those.

  • davel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This is long, but answers your questions: Why Not Signal?

    -how to explain it to my friends who use signal because i recomended?

    Okay it doesn’t answer that one. But also, whether they should use Signal or not depends on their threat models. Many people don’t see the US police state as a threat.

  • ReverendIrreverence@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I am under the impression that Signal encrypts metadata so that is useless to sell. The only thing they can turn over to law enforcement after a lawful warrant is the phone number an account was opened with (and maybe the date that happened) and the date of the last time the account was used. That is all.

      • Vegafjord demcon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Using phone numbers is the only real criticism imo any service that uses phone numbers is fundamentally compromised.

    • Schlemmy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      They offer encrypted messaging, not anonimity. They offer a way to keep your conversations private. It’s not an opsec tool, it’s not a tool to be used by the military. It’s a platform for regular people that don’t want to get spyed on or don’t want their conversations to be used agains them when legislation changes.

      "Nullum crimen sine lege, nulla poena sine lege’’

  • solrize@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

  • thermogel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Signal is great, but it is centralized. Session messenger is a great example of decentralizes e2ee messaging.

    • deprecateddino@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I used Session for a couple of years, but switched back to Signal because it did a poor job with media sharing.

      It’s been a while since I switched back, so maybe it’s fixed now?