If you use Signal messenger, you have to trust the Signal foundation, which uses Amazon’s AWS for the cloud. So you’re trusting CIA military contractors.
Signal supposedly hides metadata or who talks to whom, with a system called “sealed sender”, where it puts who sent it inside the encrypted packet. However, in a paper published by NDSS, headed by Ian Martiny, these university researchers found that Signal’s “read receipts”, which lets the sender know that the receiver got the message can be used as an attack vector to analyze traffic because it sends data packets right back to the sender. In as few as 5 messages, their team identified both participants in a conversation with a replicated version of Signal’s client.
The US Military funded Signal and Briar’s development, but yet they use XMPP. XMPP is often neglected even though it’s the most secure, private, fast, and reliable framework for end-to-end encrypted messengers.
In this brand new animated video, it discusses how XMPP works, and why it’s the best: video.simplifiedprivacy.com/xmpp/
Some will curse me out for posting this as they prefer the commercially backed project Matrix, but the Element Matrix client is objectively slower, and it’s harder and more expensive to setup your own server. And Element doesn’t let you have multiple identities at once. We should discuss concepts and ideas without attacking me as a person. If you disagree, state what facts you’re disputing.
Melpomene@kbin.social 1 year ago
Could we stop with this nonsense? Signal is neither run by nor funded by the CIA, nor have any of its many haters shown that it is vulnerable to exploitation. Signal's obfuscation of metadata is absolutely capable of being bypassed, but the core function of Signal... E2EE encrypted messaging... remains secure. Signal's core purpose was -never- anonymous communication, but secure communication.
If you need anonymity, Signal is not the way. But attempting to malign it with conspiracy porn and misleading data points does nothing but undermine support for E2EE generally.
vlad76@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
Signal uses computers. You know who else uses computers?? CIA!
Ildar@lemmy.world 1 year ago
And even FSB
Pat@kbin.run 1 year ago
You're telling me governments use computers? That's insane, I don't believe it. Next you'll be telling me they're on the internet too.
Melpomene@kbin.social 1 year ago
Should we tell them about DARPA?
Kyoyeou@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
I heard those computers use electricity, damn
SummerBreeze@monero.town 1 year ago
Would you agree that Signal does sealed sender to protect metadata? If there were flaws in this system, then should we not discuss it?
pranqster@infosec.pub 1 year ago
Could not have said this better.
gamma@programming.dev 1 year ago
It requires a phone number to log in. That already kills any hope for anonymity. I use it to message family and close friends, of which the fact that I’m messaging them is not surprising.
ninchuka@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Where did signal ever advertise it’s too be used anonymously
MashBoilPitch@lemm.ee 1 year ago
But Signal is bad, an op-ed by one of Lemmy’s founders: dessalines.github.io/essays/why_not_signal.html#c…
I certainly agree there is cause for caution, as one should always exercise where trust is placed in such matters. But there are leaps of bad logic in that writeup, and the dog pile of FUD swirling around Signal feels nearly orchestrated.
Melpomene@kbin.social 1 year ago
That's because it is. The Lemmy founder in question has a hate on for anything west and United States especially.
SummerBreeze@monero.town 1 year ago
I am NOT saying the average person should be concerned with CIA spying. What I’m saying is that one should promote decentralized internet infrastructures that empower the individual over corrupt institutions, even though this threat model likely does not apply to you. XMPP is just as easy to use use as Signal.
If you use Signal messenger, you have to trust the Signal foundation, which uses Amazon’s AWS for the cloud. So you’re trusting CIA military contractors. I am NOT saying that Signal is a CIA tool. What I’m saying is that you are trusting and obeying a centralized authority, as opposed to being able to run code on your own server. And this contributes to the centralization of the internet and a loss of freedom.
SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeah, calling Signal’s founder’s politics confused and idiotic because he referred to China and Russia as authoritarian regimes doesn’t really make me trust this person and his biases.
jack@monero.town 1 year ago
Security is not enough.
Melpomene@kbin.social 1 year ago
Is for me, but there are plenty of solutions for those who need more.
SummerBreeze@monero.town 1 year ago
I agree that I applaud the move from SMS text to Signal. I am NOT saying the average person should be concerned with CIA spying. What I’m saying is that one should promote decentralized internet infrastructures that empower the individual over corrupt institutions, even though this threat model likely does not apply to you. XMPP is just as easy to use use as Signal.
If you use Signal messenger, you have to trust the Signal foundation, which uses Amazon’s AWS for the cloud. So you’re trusting CIA military contractors. I am NOT saying that Signal is a CIA tool. What I’m saying is that you are trusting and obeying a centralized authority, as opposed to being able to run code on your own server. And this contributes to the centralization of the internet and a loss of freedom.
Melpomene@kbin.social 1 year ago
Except Signal has dozens of viable competitors, and even XMPP is likely passing through those same AAS servers if it spreads far enough. And you'll never even know, most likely.
Implying that the CIA using a cloud provider makes the entire provider suspect is silly, especially if we're talking about an E2EE service. Decentralization is great. I love it. But I also recognize the value of a centralized service when done well and when subjected to scrutiny and competition.