• Vent@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    1 year ago

    Signal takes steps to reduce the amount of metadata visible, like sealed sender which makes it so that Signal doesn’t know who sent a message. Even your payment information for donations is separated from your identity so that they know you are a donor, but not how you donated.

    It desn’t matter if Signal were hosted on Putin’s personal servers. Its security is in its protocol, it’s not trust based.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That would be true if it was implemting forward secrecy.

      The problem is that signal knows exactly who you know. I would use simplex chat or session

    • HappyKitten@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for the reply but please check the article:

      Sealed Sender is Flawed

      Signal has a flawed system called “Sealed Sender”, which encrypts the metadata of who sent the message inside the encrypted packets. However, cybersecurity researchers from the University of Colorado Boulder, Boston University, George Washington University, and U.S. Naval Academy, found that Sealed Sender could be compromised by a malicious cloud host in as few as 5 messages to reveal who is communicating with who. In this paper published by NDSS, headed by Ian Martiny, these researchers found that Signal’s “read receipts”, which lets the sender know that the receiver got the message can be used as an attack vector to analyze traffic because it sends data packets right back to the sender. Therefore, our recommendation to increase metadata protection is turn off read receipts, which can be toggled in the security settings.

      Source used: Improving Signal’s Sealed Sender Ian Martiny∗, Gabriel Kaptchuk†, Adam Aviv‡, Dan Roche§, Eric Wustrow∗ ∗, {ian.martiny, ewust}@colorado.edu †Boston University, [email protected] ‡George Washington University, [email protected] §U.S. Naval Avademy, [email protected]

      https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/improving-signals-sealed-sender/ & Paper PDF: https://www.ndss-symposium.org/wp-content/uploads/ndss2021_1C-4_24180_paper.pdf

      • Melpomene@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Signal doesn’t promise anonymity. If you’re using Signal with the intent of being anonymous, well, there are better services for that. For sending E2EE messages, Signal does well; that is its purpose.

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And they do name squatting in session oxen names.

      I’m on the fence, they do create content… The super energetic, breathless, bombastic, tone with no nuance that steam rolls over lots of considerations to make conclusions I don’t agree with, doesn’t sit well with me. But thats just me… so just I blocked their last account just to let bygones be bygones, but they made a new account to post this video so it showed up in my feed.

        • jet@hackertalks.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          We already discussed at length your session video, i’m not going to review your other videos. Like i said, let bygones be bygones, its just you made a new account to post the new video so my block didn’t work.

          • HappyKitten@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes Session trades forward secrecy away in return for uncensored identity. These are pros/cons of different approaches and we provide educational material on a variety of software

  • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    As long the encryption and everything else they do is as good as independant audits say they are, none of this matters, does it.

    The only thing they know about any user is when the account was created, and when it was last online. That’s all they’re able to hand to law enforcement

    • HappyKitten@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for the reply but please check the article:

      Sealed Sender is Flawed

      Signal has a flawed system called “Sealed Sender”, which encrypts the metadata of who sent the message inside the encrypted packets. However, cybersecurity researchers from the University of Colorado Boulder, Boston University, George Washington University, and U.S. Naval Academy, found that Sealed Sender could be compromised by a malicious cloud host in as few as 5 messages to reveal who is communicating with who. In this paper published by NDSS, headed by Ian Martiny, these researchers found that Signal’s “read receipts”, which lets the sender know that the receiver got the message can be used as an attack vector to analyze traffic because it sends data packets right back to the sender. Therefore, our recommendation to increase metadata protection is turn off read receipts, which can be toggled in the security settings.

      Source used: Improving Signal’s Sealed Sender Ian Martiny∗, Gabriel Kaptchuk†, Adam Aviv‡, Dan Roche§, Eric Wustrow∗ ∗, {ian.martiny, ewust}@colorado.edu †Boston University, [email protected] ‡George Washington University, [email protected] §U.S. Naval Avademy, [email protected]

      https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/improving-signals-sealed-sender/ & Paper PDF: https://www.ndss-symposium.org/wp-content/uploads/ndss2021_1C-4_24180_paper.pdf

    • HappyKitten@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not that obvious if millions of people do it. anyone can type criticism, you are not adding value

  • swordsmanluke@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    So… Yes, Amazon has a contract with the CIA. They have for well over a decade now. In fact, I happened to work in AWS when that program first began.

    It’s called GovCloud and it’s just a physically separated, hardened version of AWS. It’s separate hardware to meet US govt requirements for handling data and the networks are not accessible from the public internet. Otherwise, it’s just standard AWS stuff. The Men in Black want to use S3 too.

    Anyway, yes, the CIA (like JPL and NASA and a bunch of non-scary orgs) makes use of GovCloud. That’s not evidence that they’re spying on Signal messages. And even if they are, they wouldn’t have needed to set up a very public contract with Amazon. They’d just make a backroom deal and you and I would never hear about it. E.g. Even if signal switched to Azure is no guarantee.

    Finally… If you’re in the US, it’s not the CIA you need to be worried about anyway. CIA is focused on foreign threats. The NSA is the group that spies on US citizens. And they have a massive data capture facility in Utah. They’ve got taps all over the backbone internet hardware in the USA. If anybody’s watching your signal metadata, it’s them. …and they don’t need Amazon’s help to do it.

  • Pantherina@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yup, pretty obvious. Your friends that stick to apple are the worst annoyance. Android and even Windows can be hacked a lot