All my friends use Signal! Oh wait, I don't have any friends because I work in networking and software world. I'm sure this won't be problem for me, as I'm powerful bureaucrat with powerful contacts that also won't use Signal.
Wrong signal
11–20 of 84 posts
Re: Wrong signal
#12I'm happy to use Signal today.
In the long run federated protocols and servers demonstrated their resilience regarding third parties and time, see irc for example.
Probably Signal is just a reference implementation, the big deal is implementing Signal protocol in different systems (whatsapp, allo, fb messenger..).
Having said that, I would be happier to not give my phone number for registration, and contact discovery but this is today a user interface well understood and accepted outside geek communities that's hard to eradicate.
Re: Wrong signal
#13There are always security trade-offs (especially when it comes to ease of use) but until you can show me a better app, which I can get my non-techy friends to use , Signal remains the best option for the mass market.
Phone-number as identifier is pretty terrible user-experience choice. I am traveling and my phone-number has changed half-a-dozen times in the past year alone, my email has been the same for over a decade.
I tend to use Whatsapp because other people already have it but I have absolutely no motivation to use encourage other people to use Signal.
Edit: Whoever down-voted this, want to explain how this isn't a huge user-experience regression from giving your email and using gchat?
Re: Wrong signal
#14I'm happy to use Signal today. In the long run federated protocols and servers demonstrated their resilience regarding third parties and time, see irc for example. Probably Signal is just a reference implementation, the big deal is implementing Signal protocol in different systems (whatsapp, allo, fb messenger..). Having said that, I would be happier to not give my phone number for registration, and contact discovery…
I'm surprised to see that matrix.org / riot.im is not mentioned as an alternative to Signal. They have a federated, open protocol, usable open-source apps for web/Android/iOS, registration without a phone number (even email is optional), do not require Google Play, and support double-ratchet encryption (in beta, it's not activated by default yet, but it will be activated by default in private rooms in the future).
Re: Wrong signal
#15Has anyone else noticed a huge uptick in their contacts signing up for Signal this month? I've added 12 contacts just in November bringing me to about 30 contacts subscribed to Signal total, which is a large increase. None of these new contacts know each other, and only 25% of them know how to write software.
Does Signal publish registration numbers?
Re: Wrong signal
#16Given that we've seen exactly how little information Signal maintains about its users [0], this seems to me to be alarmist spreading of FUD, potentially to advance the author's agenda of dfederation in Signal, which the developers have already addressed at length already [1]. For example, their assertion that "... metadata is abundantly available here" appears to be patently false, given [0]. 0: https://www.aclu.org/…
Regardless of the merits of Signal, much of the criticism voiced in that article is nonetheless valid. Signal and other chat platforms employing the protocol are run as data-silos by design, using strongly identifying codes (phone numbers) as the required identifier — i.e., it is nearly impossible to create a throw-away account, because getting an anonymous phone number is no longer a practical possibility in a lot o…
> As for [0]; even if no relevant metadata is collected today by whoever owns the servers, nothing stops the party providing the service from doing so tomorrow.
This is a point I see bought up a LOT. I don't believe it to be useful however - proceeding down this rabbithole rapidly leads us to a place of advanced paranoia where we can't get anything useful done. Once you start assuming actual malice on the part of the software developer, even open-source code with the ability to run your own service doesn't protect you - there's multiple ways backdoors can be inserted in sufficiently subtle ways it's extremely unlikely they will be spotted before it's far too late for you.
> using strongly identifying codes (phone numbers) as the required identifier — i.e., it is nearly impossible to create a throw-away accoun
Identifiers are only valuable if there is something to link that identifier to. Account creation time and last active time are very unlikely to be valuable to your adversary (for any definition of "your adversary" you had a chance at defending against in the first place). In other words, as long as the only data they have is your phone number, then that's not helpful. All that is is a record of a) this phone number exists (which is not secret) and b) this phone number uses signal (which isn't a secret either to any even mildly motiviated attacker).
Re: Wrong signal
#17There are always security trade-offs (especially when it comes to ease of use) but until you can show me a better app, which I can get my non-techy friends to use , Signal remains the best option for the mass market.
Phone-number as identifier is pretty terrible user-experience choice. I am traveling and my phone-number has changed half-a-dozen times in the past year alone, my email has been the same for over a decade. I tend to use Whatsapp because other people already have it but I have absolutely no motivation to use encourage other people to use Signal. Edit: Whoever down-voted this, want to explain how this isn't a huge user…
I presume phone numbers are only used for registration, I can chat with people that travel and change phone number and have registered the account only on one of them, am I wrong?
Re: Wrong signal
#18I'm happy to use Signal today. In the long run federated protocols and servers demonstrated their resilience regarding third parties and time, see irc for example. Probably Signal is just a reference implementation, the big deal is implementing Signal protocol in different systems (whatsapp, allo, fb messenger..). Having said that, I would be happier to not give my phone number for registration, and contact discovery…
> the big deal is implementing Signal protocol in different systems (whatsapp, allo, fb messenger..)
Strongly disagree. The point of Signal is not just that it's encrypted. The point is that the source code is GPL and the service is free. Holding up a bunch of closed-source, proprietary, for-profit applications as examples of success only serves to obscure what should be the real goal: decentralized, anonymous, metadata-less, encrypted communication that anyone can easily use. Signal could be much closer to that goal but OWS & moxie refuse to allow decentralization or anonymity for bad reasons.
Re: Wrong signal
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Phone-number as identifier is pretty terrible user-experience choice. I am traveling and my phone-number has changed half-a-dozen times in the past year alone, my email has been the same for over a decade. I tend to use Whatsapp because other people already have it but I have absolutely no motivation to use encourage other people to use Signal. Edit: Whoever down-voted this, want to explain how this isn't a huge user…
I presume phone numbers are only used for registration, I can chat with people that travel and change phone number and have registered the account only on one of them, am I wrong?
If you lose the phone with the installation you will lose access to the account permanently (or if you don't have the SIM card or it has been disconnected).
Re: Wrong signal
#20Has anyone else noticed a huge uptick in their contacts signing up for Signal this month? I've added 12 contacts just in November bringing me to about 30 contacts subscribed to Signal total, which is a large increase. None of these new contacts know each other, and only 25% of them know how to write software. Does Signal publish registration numbers?
I did, one contact registered since last december (after I told them about it), and in the last two weeks, 3 new contacts did.
I asked them if there had been something that prompted them to install it, they said it was my other contact (the first one) who told them about it.
I rarely do any proselytism.