As Signal get your phone number. Can we considerate this application as private ? What’s your thoughts about it ? I’m also using SimpleX, ElementX, Threema, but not much people using it…

Cheers

      • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        I don’t understand this & need some explanations (I’ve heard about the dev, it’s just USA stuff, much like Telegram mentioned Russian). Where exactly are the backdoors/the encryption compromised?

        • Ardens@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Sorry mate. I really don’t want to spend time writing exactly what I linked, and then explaining it in another way. English is not my main language, and I don’t want to spend a lot of time on it. I will recommend that you read this link a couple of times, and maybe the other link posted also - they explain it very well.

          • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 days ago

            No worries, it’s not my main (or second) language either, it’s just that no backdoor is explained in that link.

            I’m just curious.

            • Ardens@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 days ago

              Oh, you think that they show you the actual door? They don’t - ever. But read the article again. Do you think that any agency will post millions into an app, where they don’t have a backdoor? The article clearly describes how the privacy part has been weakened.

              • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Isn’t it open source?

                Oh, you think that they show you the actual door? They don’t - ever.

                In open source projects they indeed do show the backdoor. That’s is one of the key points of open source (along with free-ish terms of use). Closed source projects just say “there aren’t any” without showing anything.

                I’ve said many times I’m critical of Signal & ready to switch, but backdoor seems unconfirmed.

                • Ardens@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  I’m sorry to hear that you don’t really get how this works. Do read the article and stop wasting my time here. Thanks.

    • herseycokguzelolacak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      The biggest security issue in Signal is the requirement for phone numbers and SIM cards. This basically forces all Signal users to identify themselves, and makes Signal highly vulnerable to government spying.

      Can I get the ETA for fixing this?

      • notarobot@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Requiring a Sim is not a backdoor and does not enable “spying”. I does allow knowing who is on the platform, who talks to who, when, and probably some more metadata issues. But its not a backdoor

          • notarobot@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            Not more than using username and password. Phone number is a security risk be cause you can get Sim swapped. If you have the registration password it’s safe, but a government can request a bypass. However, if you had no phone number and used username and password, governments could still request a bypass

      • silasmariner@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Does it really? Iirc, you can determine: when the account was made, and when the last message was sent. This doesn’t sound ‘highly vulnerable’ to me… Doesn’t permit inspection of metadata e.g. contacts, so as vulnerabilities go it’s pretty weak sauce

        • herseycokguzelolacak@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          A phone number uniquely identifies a person because in most of the world you need a government ID to get a phone number or a SIM card.

          Which means that if one account is compromised, then everyone that person talked to is also compromised. You know what they talked with whom. It’s an incredible security risk that Signal devs refuse to acknowledge or fix.

          • silasmariner@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            If your threat model is deanonymisation of chat users via phone numbers after one chat is fully compromised, then yeah I guess you need to register the accounts with relatively ‘untracable’ phone numbers (ie unregistered or incorrectly registered burner sims), but that’s not my threat model. I’m more concerned about server-side broad-spectrum government surveillance than I am about targeted device seizures. And of course there are mitigations even with data access on device seizure, provided you’re unwilling to provide device passwords. But, like, if you’re cooperating to the point of providing passwords you’re probably sharing what you know about other users identities anyway, so it’s a very niche case this applies to.

            • herseycokguzelolacak@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              It’s the threat model. E2E encryption is a niche ‘nice to have’. Protecting the anonymity of people who have said nasty things about politicians is the most important thing a chat app needs to do. Signal is security theater until they fix this.

              • silasmariner@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 days ago

                No the most important thing a chat app needs to do is send messages between the intended recipients making them unavailable to anyone else. Signal does this. You’re worried about ppl receiving messages and knowing who they’re from. Generally knowing where a message is from is considered a feature – if you want anonymous broadcast, pick a different technology that’s geared towards that

                • herseycokguzelolacak@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  this xkcd is always relevant: https://xkcd.com/538/

                  The most dangerous thread vector is the government forcing you to unlock your phone, and reading your messages. At which point using phone numbers becomes a huge problem.

                  Fancy encryption doesn’t matter when it’s obstruction of justice to refuse to unlock.

                  • silasmariner@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 days ago

                    Ok but a messaging app that doesn’t let you know who a message is from is completely pointless? I feel like you’re not really addressing this issue here

      • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Afaik you don’t need a phone number for Signal (a “username” can substitute it, a few years back they added it). edit: you still do

        (Also the phone number & IP was the security risk, not the messages, afaik.)

        This however was a debate about a supposed backdoor (I otherwise agree about Signal & its USA basedness, I just remain glad it exists despite it manyfew blemishes).

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          I tried to make a new account for my child recently. You need a number. It wouldn’t even work as a first signup on a wifi only tablet.

          I tried to uninstall on my phone, set him up a new acct with a VoIP number then move the account to his tablet. It constantly failed when I uninstalled and put my account back on my phone.

          You can only use one cellphone. Of you switch between two, it has to deactivate on the other.

          Then you can have 4 or 5 other devices but that acct is tied to an activated cell phone and it gets screwy if you change that phone.

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 days ago

              They implemented usernames to identify people so we could stop using numbers to find each other.

              They still use numbers (cell and possibly device/network ids) they say to identify and secure (or so they say).

              The idea is without access to your cell phone, nobody’s going to get access to decrypt your data.

              • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                Yeah, no, I get & like that, I just somehow specifically (obviously mis-)remember that they did away with phone number as a prerequisite for creating an account (everything still the same, just that the account can’t be reset).

                :(