I can't believe people are saying Telegram and Threema might be better than Signal. Signal isn't perfect but Telegram and Threema are worse.
this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
133 points (100.0% liked)
Privacy
789 readers
49 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It really depends on your use case. Most of my simple chat messages are the same as I would have in any public space. I have no need for encryption, I have need for convenience in that regard. With Telegram I have my chat history on all devices and don't need to use my phone to connect which are two must-haves for me. For my use case, Signal is the worse option. That doesn't make Signal bad, just not suitable for me.
As a privacy-concious person I am very much aware of the non-secure nature of my chats, but since that is not a factor of consideration to me when it comes to casual chats with a few friends and family members. The worst thing Telegram could do is analyse my chats and ... then what?
Signal is much worse than Telegram (in terms of privacy)
Please give several reasons why
wtf, one would be fine
it's a futurama joke
sometimes my brain's just a can opener
- The Encryption algorithm of Signal is basically the same algorithms proposed by the US gov in 2000. There is no way they would release these encryption algorithms if they couldn't break them themsleves
- If you would see which organisations are supporting Signal (look at where Signal gets all the money), you would also agree with me. There is no way these organasations are supporting them for your privacy. Why would they? The same people who are trying their best to get all your data. Believing this is just pure naivity imo but call me what you want
Please stop spreading FUD.
-
The encryption used by Signal would not be used if it could be easily broken. It's fully open source and is regularly audited. People would not recommend it if it were so broken like you say; this is just fearmongering.
-
lol, lmao even
I'm not forcing you to believe anything. Also this is a free platform where I can say what I think. I won't hold myself back from expressing my view only because the majority has a different opinikn (looking at the downvotes). I personally just wouldn't trust it. And it also doesn't have any difference to Whatsapp and co. (encryprion algos are the same) which completely removes the purpose of it even existing (ik open source is still an argument. But they don't have reproducable builds so even that falls apart) so there really isn't any reason for me to switch to it or promote it to anybody at all.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Let's be honest, Signal is not perfect either:
- It requires your phone number
- It has had some suspicious funding sources
(UPD: It was funded by CIA)
(UPD2: Here I will quote www.securemessagingapps.com:
This matters because “money talks”, as the saying goes. If the company or person behind the money is likely to have reason not to protect customers’ privacy, it’s important to know. This could be indicative of the company not doing as they say (Google, Whatsapp, for example) or changing their mind once they’ve onboarded enough customers from whom they can make money.
- It has incidents (at least once) when backend code hasn't been updated for almost a half year or so
((UPD)Source: https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/04/06/it-looks-like-signal-isnt-as-open-source-as-you-thought-it-was-anymore/#update-2021-04-06-1-39pm-pdt-by-ryne-hager)
~~(I'm gonna find sources for the last two statements a bit later to not be unsubstantiated)~~
Done.
Although, we all can agree, that Signal is still better than Telegram, or WhatsApp, or Threema, or whatever.
Still, we probably want to look at the better alternatives, like Simplex or Session.
Session is also sus because you effectively cannot host a node, last I have seen. They claim it is "against a Sybil attack" but all it does is making sure only people wih large disposable funds can have nodes, and the effect might be the exact opposite.
Simplex is more interesting in this regard because while I am concerned with initial centralization (the default servers), they made hosting your own easy. But I personally stick with imperfect yet trusty XMPP.
SimpleX is great. BUT it's not user friendly. Thus general adoption for the average user will be hard. Don't get me wrong using the app itself is easy but as soon as someone switches their phone that doesn't have technical knowledge they will loose their chats because they won't understand the concept of moving their DB. Since you don't have an identifier like a phone number with SimpleX those people could even lose contacts as a whole since they generate a new DB, hurting their social connections.
That's the reason I personally never recommend SimpleX to anyone who doesn't have the technical knowledge to understand stuff like that.
It has had some suspicious funding sources
Wait until you find out where computers, the Internet, GPS, weather satellites and Tor came from.
Telegram requires a phone number too? I mean yeah there's the option to use that blockchain phone number service, but you can do the same for Signal. 🤷
Yes, it does. And yes, it is equally bad in both cases.
- It requires your phone number
Not anymore, right? Or does it still need your number for signing up?
Just to sign up
Signal no longer requires a phone number. You can now create an account. Not sure if that helps your outlook on it, but yeah. It was a fairly recent update that this was rolled out.
Edit: being told we still do need numbers to register. I haven't gotten a new phone since well before the change was made, so I haven't actually created an account and gone through the process. It looks like I misinterpreted what was going on when I read the changelog.
That's not true. A phone number is still required to register, you can just set it not to be public.
Source: I just tried to register and it asked for my phone number.
Last I have seen, it still requires a number to register - it just doesn't have to be public.
What gets me the most is the requirement of a smartphone to register. No way I am trusting my non-public chats to a phone, so that means either Waydroid/VM (which creates issues with copypasting) or signal-cli (which is fairly inconvenient).
Signal is currently the best middleground between security, simplicity and widespread adoption.
how has no one discussed matrix here
Unable to decrypt message
Unable to decrypt message
Unable to decrypt message
Unable to decrypt message
Unable to decrypt message
Unable to decrypt message
...
That must mean it's working! :D
I don't get it at all. There are plenty of platforms like matrix, xmpp, simplex that don't require phone numbers tied to your identity. Signal has somehow managed to convince people that it's a private platform, despite it being a US hosted service that requires phone numbers.
It's a Google hosted service, which is arguably worse because they may as well be a nation-state unto themselves.
Wasn't Amazon involved here as well? It is another "nation-state".
I do not think so, no. However, Amazon is certainly big enough to be un-humorously compared to nation-states as well.
I remembered it as being AWS. Checked their blog, and the article about their spending mentions renting space in AWS and Azure too, indeed.
And the largest homeserver, matrix.org, is MITM'd by Crimeflare.
Fuck matrix.org, just selfhost.
Any homeserver that federates (even indirectly) with matrix.org will still have practically all the same data shared with it, just not your password.
What passwords where?
The password used to login to the homeserver
Doable, but a huge pain in the ass because of conflicts in the protocol. I spent about a year trying to suss them out and come up with a fix but never figured it out.
Who have they convinced that it is private? I think it has more to do with the overall purpose of the platform. Signal is not made for large group chatting with strangers like Matrix.
I use Matrix for my personal 1 on 1 chats with family and friends, so dunno
Say the US government, in a worst-case scenario in which it constantly monitors all traffic that goes through Signal’s data centers, can ‘only' see phone numbers, IP addresses and timestamps, right? Or am I forgetting something here?
Metadata and social graphs are more important than message content, esp since not many people have the time to read through individual messages to build meaning.
Signal stores phone numbers (meaning your identity, and home address), and message timestamps: who texted who and when, and who's in chats with who else. More than enough to build social graphs and connections, and also figure out where people are through their IP addresses.
Signal can't see who is texting who. They can't see which groups you are part of. Those information are end to end encrypted, same as your chats itself, your profile picture, your stories, etc.
Signal doesn't store message timestamps either.
What Signal itself knows of you is your phone number, the timestamp of your registration, the timestamp of your last connection to the server. That's it.
Yes metadata is critical but Signal handles metadata very well. Indeed, even though I'm a fan of Matrix, better than Matrix. Matrix is a metadata nightmare due to it's centralized structure and the way the protocol works.
Signal can't see who is texting who. They can't see which groups you are part of. Those information are end to end encrypted, same as your chats itself, your profile picture, your stories, etc.
This is completely false. They can absolutely see who is texting who, in fact they need it to be able to route messages. They have message timestamps, and phone numbers stored in their database.
Question, why do you "trust" signal? You can't see what code their centralized server is running, unlike matrix which you can self-host and build from source. You don't have to "trust" matrix, you can verify it for yourself.
Signals server is open source. You can run a server. You just can't connect to the main net because each server is it's own thing so it doesn't make sense besides for development purposes.
Please don't spread misinformation.
- Signal server is open source (as said) and thus can be verified: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server
- and no they can't see who you message as you can read in the technical specifications of the protocol: https://signal.org/docs/
They went over a year without publishing their server updates. And how do you know signal is running the code they say they are? Do you trust them?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Right. So arguably better than WhatsApp, where each users’ contact books, profile photos, bios, and each group chat name, picture and description is not E2E. But to call it ‘private’ is not logical, looking at the alternatives, of which some are much more private.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Nicely written article and a good read! However I had not heard of Threema before. It looks like a promising messaging app itself, anyone use it?
It's relatively popular in DACH countries.
I use it sometimes. It has its fair share of issues, and the back end is not open-source, but it is OK for the most part. Main benefit is that you don't need a mobile number to sign up.
But if you are looking for an alternative IM to use with friends and family, I would rather suggest XMPP, specifically Snikket.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I am using it to communicate with 3 people (our common ground as I don't have an iPhone and don't use Whatsapp).
A few years ago it felt a bit ruff and awkward to use, but many updates later it is as fluent as any chat app.
The security feels ok. Of course it would be a lot better, if they would open source their code.
I use Signal as my main daily messenger the two major problems in my opinion are:
- Centralized server (AWS)
- Requires a phone number to register
view more: next ›