And some people don’t like it because it used to handle SMS on Android, and they removed that feature for security reasons.
Comment on What's the deal with Signal?
salarua@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
Different people don’t like it for different reasons. Some people don’t like it because they think it has CIA financial backing (nope), and some people don’t like it because it requires your phone number, therefore it is not private (the privacy it provides is more than sufficient for anyone not actively being persecuted by a Five Eyes state), and some people don’t like it because it feels corporate (it’s a 501c3 nonprofit, and how corporate it feels is subjective).
adespoton@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
bg10k@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
That was a pretty wild decision
zergtoshi@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Handling SMS and handling secure/encrypted messages could’ve made people think they communicate securely while relying on text messages instead.
Not handling SMS fixes this source of confusion and I applaud their decision.AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The problem is that most people don’t want multiple text apps, they just want one. I had gotten a number of people using signal, and it was secure when we talked, but when signal dropped SMS, almost every one of them stopped using it, so then none of their conversations were secure.
bg10k@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 hours ago
There were ways to make it clear that it was insecure that didn’t alienate an arguable majority of their casual userbase.
Acamon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I think the number of people who care deeply about privacy and cannot tell the difference between an sms or signal message is minimal. There were plenty of ways signal could have highlighted DANGER UNSECURE CHANNEL if they had wanted to, or made it an off-by-default option, rather than drop SMS entirely. For myself and many other people it meant that family members dropped Signal rather than have an extra messaging app, and so I’m still stuck with WhatsApp on my phone…
guy@piefed.social 23 hours ago
If only the was some indicator for unsecure messages, such as a grey send button and an open padlock. 🙄
Landless2029@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I think having an unlocked symbol for standard SMS would’ve helped that…
kn33@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It was very unpopular with my girlfriend, who I had just gotten into using Signal a few months prior.
guy@piefed.social 23 hours ago
This was such a dumb decision
IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
This might be offtopic but:
Fun Fact, you can use an open source app like Secure Space Encryptor (SSE) (on iOS its called “Paranoia Text Encryption”) to send an encrypted ciphertext over any medium, like SMS, without the internet. (Most encrypted messaging apps require you have to have internet AFIAK, so people without a data plan is fucked, but with SSE, you can just send ciphertext over SMS) Its not intergrated with SMS, so you’ll have to type plaintext in the app then copy paste the ciphertext it spits out.
Or you can also PGP over SMS
I remember when Signal used to intergrate with SMS, and I kinda liked that more than the Signal today where you have to use the internet and go through their servers.
guy@piefed.social 23 hours ago
Getting people to switch to Signal was difficult in the first place
Imagine trying to get them to use PGP lmaoIDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 hours ago
xD
WimpyWoodchuck@feddit.org 1 day ago
This is how TextSecure worked before it was renamed to Signal and removed SMS support.
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
there’s oversec on f-droid that can almost automate this
adespoton@lemmy.ca 21 hours ago
This got me thinking that it should also be possible to automate on iOS with Shortcuts….
IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Oh yea that overlay thingy, kinda glitchy last time I tried it. If someone is techy enough to manage that clunkiness, then they probably can figure out how to manually copy-paste with SSE.
Btw, these apps are for nerds, not for the average person. No one irl that I know (besides me) would be willing to use either app.
felixwhynot@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Some people don’t like that they attached a crypto wallet to the app. I couldn’t care less and use the messenger daily!
guy@piefed.social 23 hours ago
I don't care or use it either, but I haven't seen a single use case for that wallet nor mobilecoins. Does people actually use it and for what?
Irelephant@lemm.ee 2 hours ago
Its honestly very hidden away, I had to dig around in settings to find it.
felixwhynot@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
My friend sent me some MOB coins mainly because he could attach messages with the transactions. So no idea what it’s really used for
wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I don’t think I’ve ever seen people say it has CIA financial backing. It did however until only a couple of years ago have strong ties to the State Department Open Tech Fund (from the same financial envelope that brings you RFA/RFE/VOA).
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
The main developer of Lemmy seems to think there’s a solid connection. I’m not jumping in that fight, I got no dog in that fight, I don’t have that kind of threat model.
dessalines.github.io/essays/why_not_signal.html#c…
However, considering he’s openly Marxist, he may be just slightly biased.
I suspect OP of this post actually saw the recent /c/Privacy thread over at lemmy.ml where Dessalines was proselytizing against Signal while not seeming to have a problem with SimpleX chat being funded by a group of Venture Capital investors, including Jack Dorsey.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
Openly Marxist is just the start of it. Dude is utterly unhinged, so his theories don’t mean a lot to me unless they’re backed by evidence.
wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Nothing in there is incorrect.
lapping6596@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I understand why, but I get annoyed that I can’t integrate it into ferdium with my other things like discord, e-mail and calendar.
AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Accurate. And if you are being targeted by 5 eyes, your phone is probably fucked, one app vs another probably won’t make a difference
boonhet@lemm.ee 2 hours ago
If you ARE targeted by 5 eyes, you’d probably want to not be using your phone for communications, but Signal sorta requires you to, even if there’s a desktop client.
However, I don’t presume to know what would be the best option. SimpleX maybe, as the servers don’t keep messages? Otherwise, I use Matrix because it’s a lot more common and very easy to set up your own homeserver. However, again, if I had to hide something from a 5 eyes threat actor, they’d just find some vulnerability in my server config or, hell, maybe they can somehow sneakily get root access through the VPS provider itself, as I’m not hosting on my own hardware.
Honestly, meeting in person might be the most private solution if you’ve got that kind of a threat model.
Irelephant@lemm.ee 2 hours ago
Signal doesn’t keep messages on their servers either. The only data they have on you is your phone number and the unix time you made your account in.
boonhet@lemm.ee 1 hour ago
How do you know that?
It’s what happens in the publicized source code, yes, but how do you know that’s what’s running in their servers? How do you know that all requests aren’t saved?
Luckily Signal has e2ee and client side code is easy to verify, so they’d only have access to encrypted messages anyway, but if you’re talking state level actors of the highest caliber, they might be able to crack Signal’s encryption eventually.
Look, I’ll agree that Signal is probably secure enough. It’s definitely secure enough for me, I only run Matrix as a hobby because I like decentralization, my Matrix server is probably less secure than Signal. But I’m just saying we can never know for sure what code is running in THEIR servers, therefore we can never trust is 100%.