Encryption can’t protect you from adding the wrong person to a group chat. But there is also a setting to make sure you don’t.

You can add your own nickname to a Signal contact by clicking on the person’s profile picture in a chat with them then clicking “Nickname.” Signal says “Nicknames & notes are stored with Signal and end-to-end encrypted. They are only visible to you.” So, you can add a nickname to a Jason saying “co-founder,” or maybe “national security adviser,” and no one else is going to see it. Just you. When you’re trying to make a group chat, perhaps.

Signal could improve its user interface around groups and people with duplicate display names.

A contractor for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and many other U.S. government agencies has developed a tool that lets analysts more easily pull a target individual’s publicly available data from a wide array of sites, social networks, apps, and services across the web at once, including Bluesky, OnlyFans, and various Meta platforms, according to a leaked list of the sites obtained by 404 Media. In all the list names more than 200 sites that the contractor, called ShadowDragon, pulls data from and makes available to its government clients, allowing them to map out a person’s activity, movements, and relationships.

ShadowDragon says in marketing material its tools can be used to monitor protests, and claims it found protests around Union Station in Washington DC during a 2023 visit by Benjamin Netanyahu. Daniel Clemens, ShadowDragon’s CEO, previously said on a podcast that protesters should not “be surprised when people are going to investigate you because you made their life difficult.”

“The long list of sites and services that ShadowDragon’s SocialNet tool accesses is a reminder of just how much data is accessible and collected from and about us to provide surveillance services to the government and others,” Jeramie Scott, senior counsel and director the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s (EPIC) Project on Surveillance Oversight, told 404 Media in an email. “SocialNet is just one example of the unchecked surveillance ecosystem that lacks any meaningful transparency, oversight, or accountability that allows the government to circumvent Constitutional and statutory protections to access sensitive personal data,” he added.

The leaked list of targeted sites and services include ones from major tech companies such as Apple, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and TikTok. It also includes communication tools like Discord and WhatsApp; activity- or hobby-focused sites like AllTrails, BookCrossing, Chess.com, and cigar review site Cigar Dojo; payment services like Cash App, BuyMeACoffee, and PayPal; sex worker sites OnlyFans and JustForFans; and social networks Bluesky and Telegram. Even relatively obscure social networks are included in the list, such as BeReal.

Apple reportedly filed an appeal in hopes of overturning a secret UK order requiring it to create a backdoor for government security officials to access encrypted data.

"The iPhone maker has made its appeal to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, an independent judicial body that examines complaints against the UK security services, according to people familiar with the matter," the Financial Times reported today. The case "is believed to be the first time that provisions in the 2016 Investigatory Powers Act allowing UK authorities to break encryption have been tested before the court," the article said.

Although it wasn't previously reported, Apple's appeal was filed last month at about the time it withdrew ADP from the UK, the Financial Times wrote today.

"The case could be heard as soon as this month, although it is unclear whether there will be any public disclosure of the hearing," the FT wrote. "The government is likely to argue the case should be restricted on national security grounds."

At launch, access to Mullvad Leta was restricted to users with a paid Mullvad VPN account, but it is now free and open to all.

Mullvad Leta has been audited by Assured.

• FAQ
• Terms of Service

Just a heads up, some of the details in the FAQ and Terms of Service seem a bit outdated and might not be accurate anymore.

Some relevant information from their FAQ section is as follows:

What can I do with Leta?

Leta is a search engine. You can use it to return search results from many locations. We provide text search results, currently we do not offer image, news or any other types of search result. Leta acts as a proxy to Google and Brave search results. You can select which backend search engine you wish to use from the homepage of Leta.

Can I use Leta as my default search engine?

Yes, so long as your browser supports changing default search engines.

Navigate to https://leta.mullvad.net/ in your browser and right-click on the URL bar.

From there you should see Add “Mullvad Leta“ with the Mullvad VPN logo to the left.

If you do not see this, you can attempt to add a custom search engine to your browser with:

• The name set to: Leta
• The URL set to: https://leta.mullvad.net/?q=%25s

You can select which backend engine to use as follows:

• Google: https://leta.mullvad.net/?q=%25s&engine=google
• Brave: https://leta.mullvad.net/?q=%25s&engine=brave

Did you make your own search engine from scratch?

We did not, we made a front end to the Google and Brave Search APIs.

Our search engine performs the searches on behalf of our users. This means that rather than using Google or Brave Search directly, our Leta server makes the requests.

Searching by proxy in other words.

What is the point of Leta?

Leta aims to present a reliable and trustworthy way of searching privately on the internet.

However, Leta is useless as a service if you use the perfect non-logging VPN, a privacy focussed DNS service, a web browser that resists fingerprinting, and correlation attacks from global actors. Leta is also useless if your browser blocks all cookies, tracking pixels and other tracking technologies.

For most people Leta can be useful, as the above conditions cannot ever truly be met by systems that are available today.

What is a cached search?

We store every search in a RAM based cache storage (Redis), which is removed after it reaches over 30 days in age.

Cached searches are fetched from this storage, which means we return a result that can be from 0 to 30 days old. It may be the case that no other user has searched for something during the time that you search, which means you would be shown a stale result.

What happens to everything I search for?

Your searches are performed by proxy, it is the Leta server that makes calls to the Google or Brave Search API.

Each search that has not already been cached is saved in RAM for 30 days. The idea is that the more searches performed, the larger and more substantial the cached results become, therefore aiding with privacy.

All searches will be stored hashed with a secret in a cache. When you perform a search the cache will be checked first, before determining whether a direct call to Google or Brave Search should be made. Each time the Leta application is restarted (due to an upgrade, or new version) server side, a new secret hash is generated, meaning that all previous search queries are no longer visible to Leta

What could potentially be a unique search would become something that many other users would also search for.

What is running on the server side?

We run the Leta servers on STBooted RAM only servers, the same as our VPN servers. These servers run the latest Ubuntu LTS, with our own stripped down custom Mullvad VPN kernel which we tune in-house to remove anything unnecessary for the running system.

The cached search results are stored in an in-memory Redis key / value store.

The Leta service is a NodeJS based application that proxies requests to Google or Brave Search, or returns them from cache.

We gather metrics relating to the number of cached searches, vs direct searches, solely to understand the value of our service.

Additionally we gather information about CPU usage, RAM usage and other such information to keep the service running smoothly.

Firefox maker Mozilla deleted a promise to never sell its users' personal data and is trying to assure worried users that its approach to privacy hasn't fundamentally changed. Until recently, a Firefox FAQ promised that the browser maker never has and never will sell its users' personal data. An archived version from January 30 says:

Does Firefox sell your personal data?

Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That's a promise.

That promise is removed from the current version. There's also a notable change in a data privacy FAQ that used to say, "Mozilla doesn't sell data about you, and we don't buy data about you."

The data privacy FAQ now explains that Mozilla is no longer making blanket promises about not selling data because some legal jurisdictions define "sale" in a very broad way:

Mozilla doesn't sell data about you (in the way that most people think about "selling data"), and we don't buy data about you. Since we strive for transparency, and the LEGAL definition of "sale of data" is extremely broad in some places, we've had to step back from making the definitive statements you know and love. We still put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share with our partners (which we need to do to make Firefox commercially viable) is stripped of any identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

Mozilla didn't say which legal jurisdictions have these broad definitions.

Hot off the back of its recent leadership rejig, Mozilla has announced users of Firefox will soon be subject to a ‘Terms of Use’ policy — a first for the iconic open source web browser.

This official Terms of Use will, Mozilla argues, offer users ‘more transparency’ over their ‘rights and permissions’ as they use Firefox to browse the information superhighway — as well well as Mozilla’s “rights” to help them do it, as this excerpt makes clear:

You give Mozilla all rights necessary to operate Firefox, including processing data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice, as well as acting on your behalf to help you navigate the internet.

When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox.

Also about to go into effect is an updated privacy notice (aka privacy policy). This adds a crop of cushy caveats to cover the company’s planned AI chatbot integrations, cloud-based service features, and more ads and sponsored content on Firefox New Tab page.

Signal CEO Meredith Whittaker says her company will withdraw from countries that force messaging providers to allow law enforcement officials to access encrypted user data, as Sweden continues to mull such plans.

She made the claims in an interview with Swedish media SVT Nyheter which reported the government could legislate for a so-called E2EE backdoor as soon as March 2026. It could bring all E2EE messenger apps like Signal, WhatsApp, iMessage, and others into scope.

Whittaker said there is no such thing as a backdoor for E2EE "that only the good guys can access," however.

"Either it's a vulnerability that lets everyone in, or we continue to uphold strong, robust encryption and ensure the right to privacy for everyone. It either works for everyone or it's broken for everyone, and our response is the same: We would leave the market before we would comply with something that would catastrophically undermine our ability to provide private communications."

Sweden launched an investigation into its data retention and access laws in 2021, which was finalized and published in May 2023, led by Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer.

Strömmer said it was vital that law enforcement and intelligence agencies were able to access encrypted messaging content to scupper serious crime – the main argument made by the UK in pursuing its long-term ambition to break E2EE.

The inquiry made several proposals to amend existing legislation, including the recommendation that encrypted messaging must store chat data for up to two years and make it available to law enforcement officials upon request.

It would essentially mirror the existing obligation for telecoms companies to provide call and SMS data to law enforcement, as is standard across many parts of the developed world, but extend it to encrypted communications providers.

Proton: “We’re consolidating our social media presence due to limited resources and no longer posting on Mastodon. Follow us on Reddit for the latest updates”

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Permanently Deleted

About Platform Tilt:

This dashboard tracks technical issues in major software platforms which disadvantage Firefox relative to the first-party browser. We consider aspects like security, stability, performance, and functionality, and propose changes to create a more level playing field. Further discussion on the live issues can be found in our platform-tilt issue tracker.

Mozilla's blog post:

Browsers are the principal gateway connecting people to the open Internet, acting as their agent and shaping their experience. The central role of browsers has long motivated us to build and improve Firefox in order to offer people an independent choice. However, this centrality also creates a strong incentive for dominant players to control the browser that people use. The right way to win users is to build a better product, but shortcuts can be irresistible — and there’s a long history of companies leveraging their control of devices and operating systems to tilt the playing field in favor of their own browser.

This tilt manifests in a variety of ways. For example: making it harder for a user to download and use a different browser, ignoring or resetting a user’s default browser preference, restricting capabilities to the first-party browser, or requiring the use of the first-party browser engine for third-party browsers.

For years, Mozilla has engaged in dialog with platform vendors in an effort to address these issues. With renewed public attention and an evolving regulatory environment, we think it’s time to publish these concerns using the same transparent process and tools we use to develop positions on emerging technical standards. So today we’re publishing a new issue tracker where we intend to document the ways in which platforms put Firefox at a disadvantage and engage with the vendors of those platforms to resolve them.

This tracker captures the issues we experience developing Firefox, but we believe in an even playing field for everyone, not just us. We encourage other browser vendors to publish their concerns in a similar fashion, and welcome the engagement and contributions of other non-browser groups interested in these issues. We’re particularly appreciative of the efforts of Open Web Advocacy in articulating the case for a level playing field and for documenting self-preferencing.

People deserve choice, and choice requires the existence of viable alternatives. Alternatives and competition are good for everyone, but they can only flourish if the playing field is fair. It’s not today, but it’s also not hard to fix if the platform vendors wish to do so.

We call on Apple, Google, and Microsoft to engage with us in this new forum to speedily resolve these concerns.