Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 258 posts

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#231

Post by lucb1e »

NayamAmarshe wrote: post #146
lucb1e wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > It's insecure by default > If you're calling MTProto 2.0 'insecure' then you should know [...] If you're calling "secret chats" the default, then you should ask around or try to use telegram on desktop or just open telegram and see how much stuff is actually encrypted.

> If you're calling "secret chats" the default MTProto is the name of the: 1. Cloud Encryption 2. E2E encryption algorithm at Telegram. MTProto 2.0 is not just secret chats, a different implementation is used for cloud: https://core.telegram.org/mtproto/AJiEAwIYFoAsBGJBjZwYoQIwFM... Both cloud and e2ee consist of what's called the MTProto 2.0 algorithm.

Yeah that cloud encryption is bullshit. If you're not transferring keys in a way that only your devices can access the data, then they can also read the data. It's indeed not broken if it didn't perform this function in the first place

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#232

Post by woojoo666 »

angry_octet wrote: post #214
derbOac wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What security problems? Genuinely curious, not trying to be antagonistic.

Commentry from tptacek: https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/1575259743278563329 on this paper: https://nebuchadnezzar-megolm.github.io/

What do you mean by "unwilling to fix"? They published a blog post addressing the exact issues you brought up.

https://matrix.org/blog/2022/09/28/upgrade-now-to-address-en...

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#233

Post by Markoff »

brational wrote: post #209
bewilderbeast wrote: post #47

I have 2 issues with RCS: 1. Requires data connection, either WiFi or mobile data. SMS does not. 2. On Android, it goes through Google Messages. I don't trust Google. So, I replaced Messages with another SMS app that doesn't spy on me and disabled RCS. If I wanted to do rich messaging through data connection, I would use Signal or similar. So, RCS is not a replacement for SMS. It's just another IM protocol. And we ha…

> So, I replaced Messages with another SMS app that doesn't spy on me and disabled RCS. I think you know this based on the rest of your post but there is no “another SMS app that doesn’t spy on me”.

Why not? SMS apps no need internet access, so only one spying there can be carrier.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#234

Post by Markoff »

faeriechangling wrote: post #132
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is genuine; the PR messages are for businesses and shareholders; especially for publically traded companies, they have to be Very Careful with what they say in public.

What they said was outrageous, "Google is screwing us and screwing you" would have been received more warmly.

Except this has nothing to do with Google, almost all SMS users would be fine with plain SMS without RCS, nobody force them to use RCS. That's just very poor made up excuse why not offer simple SMS functionality. SMS is not depreciated in favor of RCS, they coexist.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#235

Post by NayamAmarshe »

lucb1e wrote: post #231
NayamAmarshe wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're calling "secret chats" the default MTProto is the name of the: 1. Cloud Encryption 2. E2E encryption algorithm at Telegram. MTProto 2.0 is not just secret chats, a different implementation is used for cloud: https://core.telegram.org/mtproto/AJiEAwIYFoAsBGJBjZwYoQIwFM... Both cloud and e2ee consist of what's called the MTProto 2.0 algorithm.

Yeah that cloud encryption is bullshit. If you're not transferring keys in a way that only your devices can access the data, then they can also read the data. It's indeed not broken if it didn't perform this function in the first place

I'm so tired of people wanting to turn Telegram into Signal, it's never going to happen. E2EE comes at a cost. The cost is decreased scalability and inferior UX as clearly evident.

Matrix can't even load 100 old messages properly with E2EE enabled in a room. Signal can't even handle scale when it comes to chat groups and communities. There's no anonymity in both either as Signal doesn't even allow you to hide your phone number and Matrix leaks your metadata to all involved participants like crazy.

Telegram doesn't use E2EE but the privacy and security are in no way compromised.

The whole fuss about "They can read your messages" holds a very negative assumption in the first place about them reading it and then also assumes everybody's threat model involves inferior UX of managing chat backups like WhatsApp just to keep messages away from cloud.

Just take a look at your threat model and decide what you want, not everybody wants an E2E encrypted chat app because we know the compromises that we have to make with E2EE and I'd rather have my chats on cloud encryption than my local device, considering how many features Telegram allows me to have with cloud sync.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#236

Post by SentientAtom »

Due to MMS/SMS messages getting hung I switched to YAATA for messaging people who do not have Signal. It is unfortunate Google is going to take exclusive control of SMS on Android with this RCS implementation. Just another "baked" in half-assed feature that android will permission wall its users from and support at the minimum level they can get away with. Now SMS can be natively as broken as notifications, face proximity sensors, file management, background service management, power management, and a myriad of other android "features" they refuse to fix.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#237

Post by Fatnino »

apexalpha wrote: post #20

I think you're forgetting the main reason: the group of people using it to communicate is really small and shrinking every year. The only large group of people who still primarily use SMS to communicate person-to-person is Android users in the USA. Every other country has settled on either Telegram, WeChat, WhatsApp or FB Messenger, or other niche apps. These apps work on both iOS and Android and often also Windows.…

I'm in the US, have android and use sms a lot, almost entirely to communicate with users of "dumb phones".

In fact, all the ios users I communicate with do it over whatsapp or telegram.

Today I had an ios user sms me asking if he could send me a voice message. I honestly have no idea if that would have worked but I directed him to whatsapp (that he already had installed) and it was frictionless thereafter. I expect I'll never see another sms from him again.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#238

Post by jillesvangurp »

nyuszika7h wrote: post #157
jillesvangurp wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still used in that sense but it's very rarely used for actually sending texts between people. Basically, SMS used to be a big revenue driver for operators. That business has dried up almost completely. The notion of paying per message is just completely gone. So, operators stopped caring about SMS a long time ago. In the same way, call minutes are increasingly less relevant. It's all about 4G and internet now.

> The notion of paying per message is just completely gone. Not in Hungary, you still have to pay per message here unless you choose the most expensive plan.

And do people still do that or do they use whatsapp instead? This used to be a multi billion dollar business for operators. Not anymore.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#239

Post by jbverschoor »

rippercushions wrote: post #180
jbverschoor wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood Telegram. It's insecure by default, runs in a different jurisdiction. It's not even anonymous But somehow people started using it because it was "more secure" than whatsapp.

Anonymous groups are one killer app: you can easily join interest groups without leaking your phone number or other obvious ID (Facebook identity etc). Of course, it's not really "anonymous" if a nation-state wants to come after you, but that's not the threat model for most people.

If someone has your phonenumber, they will still know it's you. Even if you think you're 'anonymous'

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#240

Post by persedes »

filoleg wrote: post #77
persedes wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you getting 80% among young people? A quick google search only returned numbers around 55% among younger people. That's a looong way from a de-facto iOS only country.

Recent thread[0] about it. 0. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33169684

woah those shares are very high, thanks for digging it up.
Post reply on HN