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

241–250 of 258 posts

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#241

Post by afroboy »

jbverschoor wrote: post #30
joel35 wrote: post #21

With Signal moving away from SMS, the required messaging app stack on my phone just to be able to receive everything sent do me will have to be: - Signal -> Close friends & family I've convinced to use it. - WhatsApp -> Most of my friends. - SMS -> School notifications, 2FA, shipping updates, etc. - Facebook Messenger -> Elderly relatives - Telegram -> That one relative who wants to use this instead of Signal. Is the…

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.

> I never understood Telegram.

A lot of piracy stuff on it.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#242

Post by bebna »

Semaphor wrote: post #110
Tor3 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely in use in Europe, but it depends. I and my wife use SMS extensively, that's simply because we both use very cheap phone plans without a built-in data plan - i.e. no internet unless we have wi-fi (the pro side of that is that the yearly phone expenses is in the (equivalent of) low tens of dollars, not hundreds of dollars). When we're networked we use Line messaging. My wife's boss communicates with all…

Huh, how cheap is that? I’m almost always in wifi range, so I got the cheapest plan I could find in Germany (4€/month, so 48€/year), and even that still includes 1 GB of data (I do need the data, to sync my shopping list for example, but I’m curious how low one can go :D).

I use discotel for years now, it is basically a prepaid with automated recharge from bank invoice on O2/Eplus. Thanks to being a prepaid you always got the option to switch you setup via packets every 30 days or 4 weeks (have to check that again, it was a fixed day amount and not based on calander months anymore).

So if I'm not traveling I stay with the cheapest data option for my occasionally otg stuff and on heavy travel months I choose larger packages, because I found myself using more often, for example as access point to notebook.

I also have an Kaufland (Telekom) Prepaid card, that said it would provide basic, very slow internet, for free so that text messages over chat works, bur I don't know if I got the wrong APN settings, it has problems in my second slot or it only works if you top it up regularly, but that internet and rest never really worked, even the account management over the website doesn't really work for me.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#243

Post by bebna »

brational wrote: post #208
sillyfluke wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit weird for the "I don't use it so who cares" view to take a firm hold here. SMS is: 1. not controlled by a single company 2. a different network than the internet 3. a fail safe for people who don't use apps or are unable to at a given time for some reason (inc 2fa) 4. a fail safe for a "small group of people" who are suffering the consequences of a natural disaster. Though perhaps not economically feasible for…

And totally readable and accessible by any third party

and? If you want encryption you can add it yourself. GPG should work for example. And there was some apps that encrypt messages over whatsapp and co, there should work for SMS too.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#244

Post by angry_octet »

woojoo666 wrote: post #232
angry_octet wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

They don't, and they haven't. The flaws, like being able to add servers without every participant trusting them, require a deeper redesign.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#245

Post by taf2 »

6. A2P and 10DLC - since allowing sprint and T-Mobile to merge the primary carriers here in the US decided to charge business like signal to continue to have access to the messaging services via monopolies like the campaign registry.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#246

Post by Altho »

omnimus wrote: post #195
Altho wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most European countries have had unlimited SMS way before messaging apps where a thing

Not true at all. Most european countries are still pay per message.

As far as I know Belgium, France, Germany, the UK, Greece and I think Spain and Italy have very popular unlimited sms phone plans.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#247

Post by Semaphor »

miroljub wrote: post #163
Semaphor wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Up to relatively recently (a few years ago) it was not possible to transfer numbers from one provider to another. Huh, I guess I got lucky staying with Viag Interkom and then O2 (which was an automatic switch when O2 bought them) for so long, I only really switched providers in 2020 which was long after the EU regulation was in effect.

Yes, I remember that, although EU regulation was in effect, I still couldn't keep my number when switching from O2 to Tchibo (O2 reseller) because O2 did not allow that "for technical reasons".

I looked it up, the regulation was in effect since about 2006, but there was a loophole: It didn’t trigger if you switched from one provider to the same provider. And I guess that still counts when you switch from a reseller. That part has been changed later.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#248

Post by dns_snek »

omnimus wrote: post #195
Altho wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most European countries have had unlimited SMS way before messaging apps where a thing

Not true at all. Most european countries are still pay per message.

Maybe on prepaid (pay per use) SIM cards.

Even cheapest monthly subscriptions have at least 500 messages per month bundled, with more typical monthly plans (~$15/mo) having unlimited calls, SMS/MMS messages and around 30 GB of 4G/5G data.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#249

Post by lucb1e »

NayamAmarshe wrote: post #235
lucb1e wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ph…

> I'm so tired of people wanting to turn Telegram into Signal

Oh, no, please! What I want is the other way around: turning Signal into Telegram, i.e. keep bolting features onto Signal until it has feature parity with Telegram, or even what Telegram did five years ago. That would be a dream.

I disagree that e2ee can fundamentally not deliver Telegram's experience, at least not far off. It may need more local processing and indexing (storage), but generally it's all possible. It's just a ton of work that Telegram has sunk many millions into and will cost even more to do securely.

What you are absolutely wrong about, however, is claiming that it's all the same.

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

There are various scenarios in which your data on Signal is safe in ways that it is not on Telegram, and more actors can see your data on Telegram than on Signal. Thus, both security and privacy are impacted. That much is plain as day. Whether that is worth the trade-off, is up to you.

It's fine to have opinions and a conversation about whether the whole e2ee concept is silly, but please don't give your friends and family false senses of what the practical impact is for privacy and security when choosing these trade-offs by saying it's all just as safe and identical.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#250

Post by jhugo »

rjzzleep wrote: post #210
jhugo wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's incorrect. Read before replying. I literally said "for person-to-person communication".

I was specifically referencing YOUR language. You can't on the one hand proclaim death of a protocol and in the next sentence limit it to a specific use case. > The death of SMS is hardly specific to central Europe and the US. I hate to be a grammar Nazi, but since you're specifically attacking my wording I have to correct you. This statement would only be correct if it was: "The death of SMS for person-to-person com…

Fair enough, I guess, although I intended for "death" to refer to a process which is ongoing (contrast with "already dead" in the following sentence). It's not an uncommon usage, and Wiktionary seems to document it along with several other dictionaries.
Post reply on HN