2y ago

Signal is just a company selling privacy

Signal is a centralized app, run by a company. If they are offered enough money or legal threat they will sell out or close.

I am sure people will make an argument that its FOSS and people will just fork it if it goes bad, but a new fork will have 0 users and Signal will still have all of your old contacts. Why not make a switch now? Before it is even more popular and you have more reasons to stay? Why fork it if there are already decentralized apps that use same encryption, like XMPP apps?

Sure you can find flaws in every app, including XMPP implementations, but if we will have to write code for a new Signal fork, why not just fix whatever is that bugs you in XMPP clients?

If you want to use Matrix, that is fine as well, we can always bridge the two open protocols. But you cant bridge Signal if their company doesn't allow it.

73 comments

Signal is operated by a nonprofit tax-exempt charity corporation in the United States.
Could you please be more clear about exactly what you are saying here?
Edited: The original poster has provided no evidence for their defamatory statements.
- Signal has a single point of failure. If we really want a service that can't be taken away, then we need a free, open source alternative that is impossible for a single entity to control
  
  That single point of failure is to facilitate ease of use, with minimal reduction in security.
  The messages are e2e encrypted and the server is designed in such a way that attempting to listen in would bring it down.
  The signal org doesn't even have your address book.
  If your concern is "I don't like signal", you're not going to make much traction.
  
  Okay. Which one are you building?
  
  We have that in XMPP and Matrix. The problem is then to talk to people on it they all have to join the server on which you host your build. What if that server goes down? If you pay for hosting you're putting it into the hands of another corporation. If you self-host at home, what if your electricity goes out? Your internet gets cut off? Is everyone you convinced to ditch signal going to be happy and willing to sacrifice their convenience and ability to talk to people they want (or need) to talk to over ideology?
- Every non-profit organization I know of was run as a company. Non-profit is for organization, not for people, you can still pay yourself a nice salary and trips around the world, expensive dinners and so on. A lot of non-profits I know of extract every cent from the donors, which are often big companies like Google, by making an invoice for a clearly overpriced service at company owned by their friends, that send them the money back.
  Being a nonprofit tex-exempt charity corporation in United States is no defense of their character, their interests, nor their capability to provide a quality service or withstand a legal pressure.
  I will be perfectly clear then, you cant trust them and you cant depend on them. Reddit was a good open service once, now its dying, we need to move to Lemmy. Same will go for Signal. They still work with police, still give data such as phone numbers, when you created your account and we have no proof that they are not storing your IP, when you are sending and getting messages (so they can do a timing attack to figure out who you are talking to, if they don't give that info directly).
  I don't need proof that they have done something wrong to prove a point that no single entity should be trusted when we have the technology for over 20 years now that makes that unnecessary.
  
  How do I trust a random XMPP server more or as much as I trust Signal to protect my data? You’re telling me if the government comes knocking for metadata on some user on a small server that the owner isn’t going to just give it away? What about anyone else on other connected servers?
  You’re asking me to trust someone who hasn’t shown that they’re actively working towards privacy goals vs a centralized solution from a company that’s shown they care about privacy?
  Either way, you have to trust someone to take care of your data and I do not trust a small server owner more than an entity that’s proven they do not give information to governments. Gotta pick one of two evils, I guess.
Signal doesn't store your contacts or messages; it's end to end encryption. What are you suggesting they'll "sell out" if offered enough money?
- I was referring for them taking the bribe and letting the app die. At which point switching to another app will be unavoidable. It is better to make a switch now, then wait longer until possibly even more users depend on it.
  
  That's a terrible line of thinking. Why not just use it till the end, if it ever comes?
  
  I dont know why I cant reply to any of you in this thread. EDIT: I will do it here:
  That’s a terrible line of thinking. Why not just use it till the end, if it ever comes?
  It is perfectly reasonable to sail on a solid boat instead of jumping from one sinking ship to another.
  I get that you want to promote XMPP but accusing others of corruption is not how to do it, unless you have solid proof of it. Do you have any sources suggesting Signal has sold data?
  I never mentioned in my main post that Signal is selling data and I also clarified in this post what I was exactly referring to. It is unreasonable to put words in my mouth
  Either you have some centralization to help facilitate its ease-of-use for customers, or it becomes more difficult to setup and use. Much like the rest of life, there are trade-offs.
  I disagree. There are many decentralized apps that are easier to use than centralized apps, including Signal. It is simpler to create an account on a P2P app like Briar then a centralized app that requires a phone number like Signal.
  See the difference is, you need to convince non-technical people to use xmpp. Most of my non-technical friends already have Signal, no convincing required.
  Every XMPP server gets as much as data from your private messages as Signal does and since XMPP clients have an option for using Tor, unlike Signal, it requires even less trust with data.
  The benefits of decentralized network compared to centralized are very significant and worth trying to convince your friends. There is no single point of failure. If Signal closes due to government pressure, you will need to convince them to another app anyway and at that time there might be another popular centralized app that will again close after certain amount of pressure. The only way out of this is by pushing decentralized apps and pushing them now, rather then latter.
  Signal launched in 2014 and is open source. It is literally impossible for them to “sell out”. If the main developers want to stop developing it, it will simply be forked. Do you even understand what open source software is?
  I understand what open source is and I fully understand the dangers of centralized apps as well. I have addressed these arguments in my main post already. If it gets forked we will need to again develop a new app and grow the userbase from scratch. It is far more reasonable to make a switch now to decentralized services. I am simply trying to explain to people the dangers of centralized apps, just like I did for reddit (which was also open source centralized app until 2017 and here we are on decentralized lemmy now). Seeing people fighting for decentralization, out of no possible personal goal, while defending centralized system run by small group of people that gain funding for it, should never sicken you. You should encourage people like me that try to warn you in time and let you know about alternatives instead of booing me off, like people did lemmy advocates on reddit before this recent scandal.
  As you can see I spent a lot of time trying to teach people about this stuff to make an actual social change that will benefit us all, so please read about XMPP and think about it. Spread the word, because I can't possibly reach everybody.
  
  Signal launched in 2014 and is open source. It is literally impossible for them to "sell out". If the main developers want to stop developing it, it will simply be forked. Do you even understand what open source software is? They aren't even selling anything, signal is free, and the developers do not make money off of users. You are fearmongering paranoia, and honestly, people like you sicken me. Stop posting about things you understand nothing about.
  
  Your title uses far too active a verb to be referring to a hypothetical situation.
  I get that you want to promote XMPP but accusing others of corruption is not how to do it, unless you have solid proof of it. Do you have any sources suggesting Signal has sold data?
  
  I suppose. You're still putting trust into something. To make sure they're doing the right thing and making the right decisions in regards to security and privacy, and that they wouldn't be pressured by a government or third-party to violate that.
Signal was the first app of its kind that I actually found "real" people using it. Most other protocols its coworkers wanting to try out a new app or service. But signal i found a big chunk of my address book already had accounts. Sadly i doubt I'll ever find an app like this with so much non-techie acceptance.
- I was successful in getting about 20 people now to use XMPP and that is the only way of contact between us now.
  Once nobody used lemmy, now it's growing. We should all do our part to be on XMPP so others that want to make a full switch from centralized services can do so. We should use it and encourage others to do so as well.
  
  I think the difficult part is justifying the move from a "working service". My parents still use SMS as their main mode of communication. Going to something else "just like SMS" doesnt do much for them. Getting someone who is on Reddit to use a new Reddit that wont have a blackout means you're getting an upgrade.
I get your point that having anything related to privacy or security under the control of one organization is not ideal. However, risk will always exist and trusting Signal, at this point, seems like a good risk to take. Particularly since there are no practical alternatives right now.
Also, not all organizations are bad or will turn bad eventually. We all have to trust a lot of people for all kinds of purposes. Civilization is built on it. They key is making good decisions about who those people will be.
- I disagree, both about alternatives and about trust. I outlined XMPP (and even matrix) as alternatives in my post. If only popularity is an issue with these alternatives than we have to work on that, to make it popular, that is what this post is for. Just like Lemmy had few users once, XMPP and matrix are not as big as Signal. But their design is better and their use should be encouraged. I don't think that trusting a single entity, such as Signal is something we have to do. Trust should be only depended on if there is no way to build a system without or less of it. It is better to fight for it now, since Signal use can eventually grow and make it harder to switch. We can debate over likeliness of this corporation being good forever, even when it's current members are replaced (due to old age if nothing else), but I think it is easier to debate over their capability to be good if they are under pressure of US security agencies. Even if they are willing to risk their freedom (and their lives) for their users, they can't stop the government of shutting them down. The state has killed people for far less over the years.
You and everyone else in the fediverse needs to stop with this fanaticism that anything centralized is automatically a bad thing.
You can use Molly. I think its a fork of signal and used by many. Its on Droidify , not sure which repo.
- XMPP is there for more than 20 years, we shouldn't need to make a switch everytime a new app comes along. If there are some problems with how clients look, its FOSS and open protocol, instead of forking centralized apps, you can fork an already used services.
You don't understand how FOSS works. If signal "sells out" we just take a fork of the repo before the sell out and continue building the private app we love. Also signal uses no central server for your content. It's device to device, if they sold out right now all they would have is a list of users, but no conversations.
- I have already explained this in my post, it's a second paragraph. I will quote it for you:
  "I am sure people will make an argument that its FOSS and people will just fork it if it goes bad, but a new fork will have 0 users and Signal will still have all of your old contacts. Why not make a switch now? Before it is even more popular and you have more reasons to stay? Why fork it if there are already decentralized apps that use same encryption, like XMPP apps?"
From what I've seen of the people in charge of Signal- they'd probably close before they sell out.
That said, you make a very good point. Having all the registered users in one place, is a vulnerability. A great many of us have non technical friends/partners/siblings/coworkers/etc; and encouraging them to use ANYTHING new is pulling teeth. So Signal is great, but it's still eggs in one basket- if they do something user-unfriendly or sell out or close, we are back to square one in begging/pleading/cajoling people to (please) try this (much better) app.
I've also lost a few people who used Signal over one stupid problem- the iOS version has no backup/restore function. If you lose your phone, or uninstall the app, all your saved chats are gone and there's no way to get them back. Android version at least has a useful backup/restore.
- Exactly my point is that if it closes we will have to push for new apps anyway and it is better to do it now, before more users potentially use SIgnal and are left without their app.
  
  Personally I don't think it's likely that signal will close, or that they will sell out. I think the more likely problem is the sort of thing I mentioned, that having a single dev team will be a bottleneck or will reduce user choice. The iOS backup thing I mentioned is one example of that. Usernames rather than phone numbers is another one. Having only one code base does make it easier to audit. And having one foundation in charge does mean there's an easy path to pay for those audits. But it is still a single point of failure.
  To be clear- as single point of failure go, I trust Signal more than the next 10 put together. What I don't trust is the whole using phone numbers and SMS verification for sign up. And I would prefer their architecture was a bit more open/federated.
Doesn’t XMPP collect hella metadata unlike Signal?
- There is no one to "collect" this data. You do have to trust the servers that others are on, since its federated, which is the issue with all services.
  
  I think that’s where I’m icky about it. I don’t know that I trust other servers more than I trust Signal. Which, I mean, is not great to say given that in a perfect world I would rather not rely on one organization to keep my “data” private - but hey.
  I don’t mind so much on Lemmy or Mastodon because I’m not looking for privacy but if encryption is the main selling point of something, a random XMPP instance doesn’t really inspire confidence at the moment. But hey maybe that’ll change in the future and XMPP will require less metadata to work.
- XMPP is decentralized, you can run your own server. In open decentralized protocols, such issues are resolved by design. Further more most XMPP servers don't require a phone number, why would they, unlike Signal.
Good call. I'm setting up a Snikket server as I write this.
Are you suggesting any alternatives? Most of the ones I have tried are either too technical or too much effort for everyone I know so I have nobody to talk to outside of signal and plain sms
- I suggested XMPP in my original post. It is hard, but still will take just few minutes, for a lifetime of solved privacy and centralization issues. Unlike centralized apps, decentralized networks don't really die, just look at email. XMPP is over 20 years old and will live for 20 more, few minutes spent to set it up is well worth it.

73 comments