this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024
732 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59197 readers
2518 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PreciousPig@lemmy.world 36 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's the same argument they used when ditching SMS-support ☹️

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

I'm not nearly as salty about SMS because of the following differences from the WhatsApp scenario. Signal-SMS was only supported on Android, call it half of Signal users whereas a potential WhatsApp integration (or lack thereof) would affect nearly all Signal users. Then the Android users who have to reach others over SMS already have a built-in system app that does this, so they don't have to install third party app that exists to vacuum data. So the downgrade for the Android Signal user is in ease of use, not in overall security.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Except most people are not going to tolerate having a multiplicity of apps, and if people in your circle don't already use signal, they definitely won't now. Whereas previously, I was getting pretty decent traction from people slowly adding it.

[–] Takumidesh@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

In the modern age, it's getting easier to hard-line your messaging platform though.

If people are already used to having multiple messaging clients for multiple people, it's less of a jump to add one more.

[–] FrostyTrichs@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

This has been my experience as well. In the past friends and family were more reluctant to break away from whatever their default communication app was. These days most people are already familiar with the idea of using one thing to text, another to "message", and often more than that. I've had great success converting people to more secure platforms now that they understand the process.

[–] RmDebArc_5@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Don’t the built in system apps also vacuum data?

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 13 points 8 months ago

This is Lemmy. Here we believe everything vacuums data!

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The built-in apps get and send SMS from a system service on Android. In nearly every case the system app is from the same vendor as the system itself which means there's no significant opportunity for data disclosure that doesn't already exist within the system. If anything , the system has much larger opportunity to vacuum data. Therefore if you don't trust the system SMS app, you shouldn't trust the system either. If you trust the system, you can probably trust the system SMS app too. Third party SMS apps present net additional opportunity for data disclosure so one has to trust the one they use doesn't vacuum data.