521
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 105 points 2 months ago

I can't imagine any messenger is private if you invite random people into a group chat 🤦‍♂️

[-] [email protected] 55 points 2 months ago
[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

error: problem between keyboard and chair

but nowadays maybe it works better with screen

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

PEBCAK Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard!

Knew of an IT help desk employee who used this as a resolution in a ticket. Yeah, he got fired as soon as the customer looked up what it meant.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

The actual military grade (xmpp based) messengers implement security lables, meaning messages are tagged with the required security clearance and if you invite random people to a chat they can't see the messages.

[-] [email protected] 63 points 2 months ago

EVERYONE SHOULD DOWNLOAD SIGNAL for PHONE-NUMBER-based communication, tho. Proper RCS is not here yet (and won't be in a long while), so let's try to mobilize people to Signal.

DeltaChat is cooler for non-phone based communications, IMO, and decentralization makes it way sexier and worth this tradeoff.

[-] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago

Actually RCS has encryption in the new spec now, and we could see encrypted RCS messages implemented on iOS and Android within a year.

But even so, use Signal.

[-] [email protected] 42 points 2 months ago

RCS still leaks metadata like a sieve. Encryption, considering the platforms that exist today (Signal and SimpleX), should not be the minimum requirement. Plain-text messaging should not even be possible in modern secure messaging platforms. The platform should be open source and be engineered to mitigate the collection of metadata - like Signal and SimpleX.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

I think they mean that it'll take time for everyone to get it. My carrier still doesn't even have RCS at all.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

xmpp is like if deltachat was good

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

Isn't DeltaChat just PGP encrypted email? Could be wrong

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

Kinda, but that's the gist of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

I use signal myself but I also use simple X. I can't use delta chat because I use proton for my email and therefore can't use delta.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Delta Chat is not associated with your email account, as far as I can tell. Am I wrong?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 50 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Signal is the place for top secret communications, but not for any government business, top secret or not (at least not when using a public instance - they could fork the project to keep decryptable records on gov servers where the official gov instance would run).

[-] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago

at least not when using a public instance - they could fork the project to keep decryptable records on gov servers where the official gov instance would run

All the people in the chat were high enough that the government for free provided them with secure rooms in their homes so everything would be done through government hardware and encryption programs.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago

Yes, ofc, using Signal was intentional to not keep any records/evidence.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

The protections for classified information are not just about information security. They are about physical and operational security as well. That's why s SCIF has a "two locks" policy, and requires things like 4" steel doors.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 25 points 2 months ago

Considering the US government now owns Meta and thus WhatsApp, it’s an interesting case… why did they use signal?

[-] [email protected] 35 points 2 months ago

because "they" don't trust the people they "represent" and they want to avoid federal archives

they must know something about WhatsApp that we don't

[-] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago

There's nothing to know; facebook is facebook, and nobody trusts facebook for data security. Whatsapp is not, nor will it ever be, true end to end encryption, when facebook owns the locks and keys.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

The government does not "own" Meta. Words have meanings.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

Disappearing messages

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

If there is backdoor for them, then there is a backdoor for everybody who knows where to look.

[-] [email protected] 23 points 2 months ago

I personally use carrier pigeons with caesar cipher. I know I can't out tech google, so I will go medieval.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago

What kind of private communication can we talk about if you must have a valid phone number to use Signal?! Lol

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

Signal recently implemented "usernames" instead of phone numbers

[-] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Pretty sure you still need a phone number for an account, though - the usernames are just for sharing your contact with other people.

Most peoples' phone numbers are easily linked to their identity. Which means the government knows who's using Signal.

Usernames are definitely an improvement, but this is a fundamental limitation in Signal's design.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago

But still, to use it, you need a phone number, which in many countries can only be purchased with a passport. That's the main rule. If privacy is really needed, personal identification should be excluded so that it's basically impossible to determine who owns the account.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago

The exact reason why it's bad for top secret communications is why individuals should use it or something like it. That is government auditability.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago

Signal is great, that's why I'm suspicious that this recent story is to not only target journalism, but also secure app communication. I wouldn't be surprised if it's used as an excuse to remove signal from the app stores.

Hopefully I'm just being too paranoid.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago

Immediately had that thought as well.

Don't blame the barn for not holding the horses when you leave the fucking door open.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

I don’t think that’s the case, I just think it is old people not know how to use technology.

Additionally, all these people in power are using signal, how is that not a loud endorsement that everyone should be on it.

Sadly, my contact list remains mostly on WhatsApp and Facebook messenger only.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Anyone who uses Facebook messenger as their only messenging app will need to text or call me. Fuck that. I do, however, use WhatsApp and discord for work and uni group chats. If or when that's no longer the case, people who only use those will need to text me, too.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

Wherever Signal is mentioned, I shall mention SimpleX-Chat.

Zero user ID needed to use. No phone numbers and no username.

SimpleX-Chat!!!

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

Out of band key exchange is great -as long as people can physically meet and exchange QR codes. In reality, they are often sent via less secure means. As always, the humans are the weakest security link.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Fair point, it always feels dirty to send invite-link through WhatsApp, the dominant messenger in EU.

How would one go to solve the invite problem? How does Signal handle this?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Consider Briar.

Uses Tor. Works directly over Bluetooth/WiFi if the internet is censored or shut down. Decentralized, no accounts. No phone number required.

Of all the options available, I feel like this one is the best suited to current threats (oppressive governments with all-encompassing surveillance, and the willingness to destroy critical institutions and infrastructure).

The app is super barebones right now - feels like SMS - but it works. Main downside is that both participants have to be online at the same time (maybe group chats can work around this?), since there's no servers.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

How does the Bluetooth work? If you're close enough to be in bluetooth range with someone aren't you close enough to just speak to them?

[-] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

One use case could be mass protests/uprisings, where you have a lot of people congregated in a small area. An increasingly popular strategy among governments these days is to just shut down the entire internet in an agitated region. Bluetooth could keep information flowing between people with only mutual contacts, as they move in and out of range.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

I'll have to give this a look. Since going to music festivals where I couldn't text my friends I've wanted a decentralized adhoc network message app. Using pgp all messages bounces through all devices within local device network range but you can only read the ones you have private keys for.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Regarding the trick of an adversary gaining access by emailing or SMS'ing a QR code for adding another device...

Why does the new device not demand the PIN before being added?

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

It does, I tried it. Though, that may have been an addition since the attacks started.

Though, in that specific case - Russian agents conducting espionage via targeted individuals - it's very likely they surveil their targets long enough to catch their device PIN before they nab the phone and return it. In the end, there is very little recourse to defend against this type of Evil Maid attack. Signal is really better at protecting against mass surveillance, but for individuals directly targeted by state espionage? You would need serious opsec, using air-gapped computers kept in safes or guarded by humans 24x7 and other crazy stuff. They have rules about what can be physically done with devices containing top secret information for a good reason.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
521 points (96.6% liked)

Privacy

38186 readers
305 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS