Comment on What's the deal with Signal?
zeca@lemmy.eco.br 4 weeks agoIf we have a federated messager that some people self host, would that actually be more secure? i dont know much about how federation works, but i imagine that an intelligence agency could make an instance that would federate to the others, listen to the metadata of the exchanges in the network and rebuild a social graph like a centralized server could. Is this a non-issue?
muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Its actually less of an issue with federation. The way most federation works is that messages are only exchanged with servers that have a relevant party, ie if I’m on instance a and ur on instance b then our messages are only exchanged between instance a and b instance c would have no idea about any of it.
Its even better than that because with sealed sender the recipient server will know that u have received a message and from what instance but not which user on the instance.
PapstJL4U@lemmy.world [bot] 4 weeks ago
instances are severs - you now have two servers you need to trust.
The average person has no own server.
muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
The point of any secure system is that u shouldn’t need to trust the server. If signal federated it makes the capability for any single server to collate data across all instances significantly harder.
zeca@lemmy.eco.br 4 weeks ago
oh, i see! that would be cool