99
Is it (still) worth trying to switch my family and friends from WhatsApp to Signal? (Read all of it, please.) (kbin.social)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This may sound a bit dumb, but eh.

So when that WhatsApp privacy policy change thing happened in early 2021, I tried switching from WhatsApp to Signal and Telegram. Telegram kinda stuck with me since i still get news from there, but Signal... not really because I didn't care about privacy back then. Now, I want to make the switch from WhatsApp to Signal, and I have a few plans on how to do that. But, is it worth it, since most people in Türkiye use Whatsapp and even if I switch my family and friends over to Signal, they'll still use WhatsApp since most people are on there.

So, yeah. Should i try, or is it not worth doing? Let me know, also, thanks in advance!

(Note: Most of my family and friends don't really care about privacy.)

(Note 2: This was also posted in r/signal and r/privacy subreddits.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (4 children)

Well,I am quite suspicious just about signal as company.And have some reasons for that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Okay, but what else are they gonna use? Matrix?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    yeah,or matrix or xmpp

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago*

    Signal is not perfect, but it's still the best option we have for mainstream consumption.

    The points you illustrate demonstrate that signal will not be the final form of private communication. They are poor stewards of federation, and open source, so somebody's going to eat their lunch. Sooner rather than later.

    I want signal to be great, but they're too focused on control so I don't think they can let themselves be great

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)

    Hmm, good points.
    Most of these have some kind of (strong or weak) counter-arguments.
    I have mixed thoughts about the first point, they kinda have some good points though.2 and 4 got resolved, very critical issues nonetheless, shouldn't have happened. The 3rd point seems kinda OK, I'm sure they would like the idea of making that open-source, but that would probably make it bypassable, correct me if im wrong. I didn't know about the fifth! The reason they gave also seems defenseless.

    Concerning situations for all of the points.

    Not trying to hate or back up Signal here, just my opinions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    There's no reason you can't open source anti spam. The only reasons not to do so are that it's either absurdly to bypass if it's known, which makes it useless, or if they don't want it visible.

    Why wouldn't they want extra eyes on it? That's how a lot of vulnerabilities get found, people actually checking the code and testing it.

    That suggests some other reason, and they haven't said (that I'm aware of). Since that means that part can't be trusted, you can't trust the rest of it either. That isn't to say you can't choose to use it, but you're using it blind, which makes it no more secure or private than telegram or any other options.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 3 years ago

    Hmm, yeah true. More people can take a look at the code, find vulnarabilities and fix it. Then it should be open-source too, since it would also be hard to bypass even if that happened. So there's not really an argument to not make it open-source.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent