What's the argument against allowing anyone to host their own signal server? I mean, the code is open sourced, why not allow people to set up their own servers too?
Privacy
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
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
Because Signal is against it. Read the article, there is some talk about it.
There's Session, which uses some kind of shitty blockchain version of not-quite-Tor. Every user acts like a not-quite-onion-service and your username is a not-quite-onion-address.
not-quite-bad-answer 😏
@FarLine99 I think there are also chat systems that use the real Tor network.
Your link leads to an image...
The link in the body leads to the essay.
I remember when it made the rounds on different sites (I found 2 HN links with an comments)
Yeah. Post is made from app so it is it's behavior. Many Lemmy apps behave in similar way.
Use Session
If you're looking to chat about certain topics, there are open groups, so called communities, about a lot of things: https://sessioncommunities.online/
Calls are in beta and buggy. Lacks features, translations. Good concept but not mature realization.
This same thing has been reposted here so much. So I am going to copy-paste my original response once again.
Governments routinely fund the development of secure and open communication systems because they themselves benefit from having such communication tools which can be trusted. By the logic presented in this "essay", one shouldn't be using the internet at all. What you need to check is whether Signal's technical claims about its encryption is true or not. There is nothing in this article that raises any question on Signal's encryption. We already know how much data Signal has on its users through their responses to various legal subpoenas over the years (spoiler: its pretty much nothing).
Here are some cool links for you to check out:
https://signal.org/bigbrother/
https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/new-documents-reveal-government-effort-impose-secrecy-encryption
Why is it beneficial for the government to have these tools? They already have such for internal use. I am sure that the officials do not use Signal. Why not kill Signal as an organization so that users don't even think of leaving WhatsApp?