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?
It’s fine as long as you don’t do something silly like invite a journalist to your top secret government group chat.
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 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
deleted by creator
Maybe you should reply to that comment you’ve mentioned and ask them to explain why they’re spreading FUD.
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.
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.
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.
deleted by creator
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.
I have managed to get all my friendship group on signal and we use it daily. While it does have its flaws (mainly being centralised and US based), I try in life to not let perfect be the enemy of good. Until there’s a stable and easy to use alternative I can point my friends to, I imagine we’ll stay on Signal.
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.
Yes, i hate this in these kinds of discussions. It so often devolves into how you’ll be safe from surveillance by world governments (spoiler: you won’t be, if they really care).
And here I am, just not wanting to hand data over to giant corporations that have been proven to use it for no good.
Heck, even if there was no good actor/solution, not giving all your data to the same bad actor is already a step up.
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.
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.
I can’t see how they could manage that without slurping up your contact information.
AFAIK the client slurps up your contacts, but the E2E encryption ensures that the Signal server cannot actually see those.
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.
deleted by creator
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.
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.
Don’t they also need to store who to send your messages? From a technical point of view?
They store where to deliver the message, but not from who that message came.
Didnt know abput that.
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.
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.
Best answer/link and cause…
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
Nothing, it’s good. There’s FUD to get you not robust it
There was one instance of the white house using signal on the down low to evade records retention and then got caught because they accidentally invited a journalist to the houthi bombing group chat, bit that’s a user error
And they didn’t use a trusted Signal app, it was an Israeli clone app IIRC












