281–288 of 288 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fortunately for most of the human population, the politics of the author of the software we use isn't really a consideration.
I'm sure most people wouldn't use software created by Nazis. Considering Communism has arguably worse track record, I would definitely avoid any software created by its proponents if it's at all possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Non-technical people I've introduced to Signal on iOS stop at the "upload your contacts" stage and go "I don't want this random little company to have access to my contacts". These are non-technical people who understand the importance of keeping their contact list private, and there are a lot of them. Making it a de facto requirement that users on your network be personally identified via a phone number ("get a burn…
> These are non-technical people who understand the importance of keeping their contact list private Do you take this opportunity to point out to them that they do away with this privacy every time they install whatsapp / fb messenger / hangouts / skype / practically anything that asks for contacts permissions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you definitely don't want to be using Telegram.
I'm curious about this response. Could you please explain or point to something that explains, for a common person who doesn't code or cannot build code or cannot maintain servers, how Signal would provide more control and avoid being locked to a single vendor when compared to Telegram?
Both Telegram, Signal¹ rely on a central server to which all users connect. If that server goes up in flames then nothing will work for anyone. Or if those who run it turn out to be evil or otherwise doing bad things then there is nowhere you can go without losing all your contacts.
But in a system that has multiple servers that talk to each other, like email and Jabber/XMPP, you have a choice in who provides the server while still being able to talk to everyone on the network. So then it is at least possible to switch to another server or provider and still be able to reach your contacts. It is also possible to run your own server, or convince your more technical friend to run one for you. This model is called a federated client-server model.
A true serverless peer-to-peer system would in theory be even better, but in practice it is much harder to build and maintain, especially on mobile where devices may lose coverage at any time. So for example Skype (before Microsoft bought them) would promote some clients to "super nodes" which other clients would use to communicate ... kinda like having servers but with less control over who they are.
(Note, I work on XMPP software so I'm kinda biased)
¹ There appears to exist server software but it is unsupported and might not be useful for more than talking to yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious about this response. Could you please explain or point to something that explains, for a common person who doesn't code or cannot build code or cannot maintain servers, how Signal would provide more control and avoid being locked to a single vendor when compared to Telegram?
It does not. In practice both are equivalent in that regard. I guess tptacek meant that Signal might have less control over you than Telegram, but that's a different issue from what I was thinking of. Both Telegram, Signal¹ rely on a central server to which all users connect. If that server goes up in flames then nothing will work for anyone. Or if those who run it turn out to be evil or otherwise doing bad things th…
Certainly, it seems that while running your own server might not be actively discouraged, it isn't supported by the Open Whisper Systems team at the moment.
I'm feeling dirty, because I don't like to be that negative, especially if we're talking open-source software. And I feel that I kinda hold this project to higher standards: If I compare this to WhatsApp/Telegram/Threema/Whatever, I inheritently, somewhat subconciously expect more from Signal. And I'm disappointed. I tend to repeat the 'central server' and 'a phone number is not an address and not public information,…
If we were going to rank our priorities, they would be in this order: 1) Make mass surveillance impossible. 2) Stop targeted attacks against crypto nerds. It's not that we don't find #2 laudable, but optimizing for #1 takes precedence when we're making decisions. If you don't want to use your phone number, don't use it. You can register with any GV, Twilio, Voicepulse, or other throwaway VoIP number. If you don't wan…
Also can we please stop calling this a Desktop app? It requires Chrome to run, so it's neither Desktop nor Web app.
I'm feeling dirty, because I don't like to be that negative, especially if we're talking open-source software. And I feel that I kinda hold this project to higher standards: If I compare this to WhatsApp/Telegram/Threema/Whatever, I inheritently, somewhat subconciously expect more from Signal. And I'm disappointed. I tend to repeat the 'central server' and 'a phone number is not an address and not public information,…
I feel the same but in a bit other way. They tied up everything very closely to google services and they tell me "we really care about your privacy so use our app that requires google play frameworks on your android device". Those are two completely different things, use gapps or opensystem apps? It's 100% no-go for me and the whole idea seems to be a bit sarcastic for me. It hurt me when they removed content encrypt…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would argue that the removal of SMS encryption is a worse failing. Accepting all key changes without question renders you vulnerable to active attacks, but you remain safe from mere passive collection (the most common case). On the other hand, whatever Whisper Systems would have you believe, people really do still use SMS. A lot. I will never convince my friends to use an internet-based messenger - I might as well…
Why do your friends care about the underlying transport? I too think SMS transport should have been maintained, but I believe it only really matters when you're stuck without mobile data access (for example, when I was on a cruise ship earlier this year I had roaming SMS/voice but not data). As long as you _do_ have mobile data access at both ends, then a message to another TextSecure user will be sent encrypted over…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> FF isn't dead From http://www.computerworld.com/article/2893514/an-incredibly-s... : > In the last 12 months, Firefox's user share -- an estimate of the portion of all those who reach the Internet via a desktop browser -- has plummeted by 34%. Since Firefox crested at 25.1% in April 2010, Firefox has lost 13.5 percentage points, or 54% of its peak share. I love Firefox, but having used FxOS and mobile versions of M…
Chrome is not any better at all. Speedwise they're about the same, but Chrome has better separation between tabs. However it allocates ram like there is an infinite supply of it, and it absolutely kills the battery on my computer. This is with the same extensions installed in both browsers, uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger, No Script, Last Pass, and Wunderlist.