"Signal is being blocked in Venezuela and Russia. The app is a popular choice for encrypted messaging and people trying to avoid government censorship, and the blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries..."

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 186 points 2 years ago* (9 children)

It’s like a medal of honor for a privacy preserving app 😄

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Indeed. If whatsapp isn't on the list, then I have all the confirmation I need.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 52 points 2 years ago (25 children)

    could matrix.org be as easily blocked, since it's decentralized I'm wondering?

    At least it means that Signal is working as intended if they are blocking it, I guess that they don't have back doors.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Being decentralized prevents DNS or IP blocks but not blocks through DPI.

    Signal has an option to masquerade it's traffic as regular HTTPS, I don't know if Matrix can do such a thing.

    https://x.com/signalapp/status/1821979304626155930

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Matrix is in fact decentralized but in reality it is not so much, I don't know the number exactly but the majority of users use the matrix.org server

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] [S] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    could matrix.org be as easily blocked, since it’s decentralized I’m wondering?>

    Or SimpleX?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 41 points 2 years ago (71 children)

    blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries.

    Or... you know... at least for Venezuela, the USA constantly fucking around with their elections and politics and local assets using Signal or something. Maybe, I dunno?

  • source
  • hideshow 71 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (67 children)

    Yeah. Telegram, should be next, there's a huge risk with it too. And email! Social networks too, just in case. And postal mail, we can't forget that. We should crack down any form of uncensored communication.

    All for the benefit of the people, of course. \s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 67 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (22 children)

    I mean signal was funded in part by the US intelligence community up until last year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago

    The current president of Signal is also still happy to do interviews with US-defense-oriented think tanks like Lawfare.

    They probably still are funded by USIntel, considering how interested RFA was in pushing Signal in privacy-oriented spaces.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (21 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 27 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    Would peer to peer apps be resistant to this sort of thing?

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It depends. Somehow it has to discover the peers. Other than that, they could block traffic between residential IP addresses and there goes large part of the P2P network

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago

    Russia and Venezuela are huge hotbeds of piracy from populations without access or capital to access most forms of entertainment.

    Breaking P2P in this manner would basically be getting rid of the circus part of bread and circuses. Not a good move for an authoritarian.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (9 replies)
    [–] 27 points 2 years ago

    Signal honored!

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    why telegram is not blocked? makes you think...

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I mean it was blocked before Signal was blocked. Russia somewhat famously badly broke their Internet trying to shutdown telegram... and eventually gave up.

    I'm guessing Signal finally has enough market share to get the Russian government's attention but not enough market share that they think the web of proxies that kept Telegram online will keep Signal online.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [+] 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (13 children)
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    I wrote this, but I'd also like to add Drew Devault - Why I don't trust signal. There's a huge disconnect between what privacy advocates are saying about signal, and what reddit "privacy" communities think about it. If you read the article I linked, you'll see its because the Open Technology Fund (a US state-run entity), actively pushes signal in privacy spaces.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

    Honestly I would've expected it to be blocked much earlier

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 15 points 2 years ago (24 children)
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (19 children)

    Matrix isn't secure depending on how you use it. It also doesn't protect individual identities terribly well.

    Simplex Chat would be the better option however the main Simplex Chat server and matrix server could end up blocked as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago* (10 children)

    Matrix is entirely self-hostable, and you can turn off both federation, and the requirements for any linkable identifiers.

    Signal by contrast requires your phone number, isn't self-hostable, and is based in a five-eyes country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Matrix doesn't protect metadata, which is arguably just as (if not more) important than message data. Signal by contrast does protect metadata and proper implements Perfect Forward Secrecy for all chats. I do think Signal's centralized design and phone number requirements problematic, but Signal still has many merits. Such as its massive user base for a AGPL-only project.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago (18 children)

    Smart move, considering Signal is a US-hosted centralized service that has to comply with US NSL laws.

    These comments below seem to be unaware of all the issues privacy advocates have of signal.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    I don't get it, are you really arguing that Russia and Venezuela are blocking Signal to protect their citizens from American snooping?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    All countries should ban US-domiciled companies like signal, or any communication platform hosted in Five-eyes countries, and especially ones domiciled in the US, which has to adhere to National Security Letters.

    https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security-letters/faq

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    Isn't the whole point of something like End-to-End Encryption so that not even the company themselves can read your messages?

    In that case it wouldn't matter even if they did turn the info over.

    Edit: I read more into the page you linked. Looks like those NSLs can't even be used to request the contents either way:

    Can the FBI obtain content—like e-mails or the content of phone calls—with an NSL?

    Not legally. While each type of NSL allows the FBI to obtain a different type of information, that information is limited to records—such as “subscriber information and toll billing records information” from telephone companies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can read my article, or Drew Devaults on why he doesn't trust signal, which get more into this, but the short version is that US security forces don't have time to read the content of everyone's message anyway, they care more about the metadata: message timestamps and social graphs.

    Signal stores all that data (via required phone numbers, meaning its linked to your real name and address), and via the US's key disclosure laws, it would be illegal for them to tell you that the US government is hoovering up that data.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 11 points 2 years ago*

    Why countries that do not prosecute political dissent bock apps used by political dissenters? /s

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Unless you click the “unblock” button.

    Gotta love Verge.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›