• MynameisAllen@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I saw the headline and was ready to rage about why they should just use signal instead. Then I read the article and honestly this is a fucking genius use of tech

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I read it and don’t understand. Why is this better than Signal? Or the 500 other secure file/messaging protocols?

      Jabber seemed to work perfectly for Snowden…

      • rosco385@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Because analysing network traffic wouldn’t allow an adversary to see what you’re sending with Signal, but they could still tell you’re sendig a secure message.

        What the Guardian is doing is hiding that secure chat traffic inside the Guardian app, so packet sniffing would only show you’re accessing news.

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          analysing network traffic wouldn’t allow an adversary to see what you’re sending with Signal

          How are they analyzing network traffic with Signal? It’s encrypted. And why does it matter if they know you’re sending a message? Literally everyone using Signal is sending a message.