32
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
32 points (86.4% liked)
Privacy
31919 readers
705 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
- 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
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah Im gonna pass on the non audited chat with only 5 stars and stick to using signal.
See you later when Chat Control passes :)
Chat Control, if passed, will affect this chat as well. The only way to bypass it, would be chat revolution.
Chat Control will not affect this chat if it's source code and public instance are hosted in darknet ;)
While I do love your optimism and appreciate the addition of this software to our (collective) arsenal, it absolutely can. Chat Control can force the developers to add back doors, for example, or to start log collection to include IPs and PSPs, etc. Please don't misunderstand, I'm not negating the benefits of Amnesichat at all. It's awesome. But, being a chat, it would still fall under the same regulatory nonsense as Briar, for example, which can also be run through Tor. Now, whether the developers adhere to Chat Control regulations, is another thing altogether.
If a backdoor is forced to be added into any project, wouldn't someone be able to fork it and go on without the backdoor? Maybe even the original dev incognito...
Theoretically, yes. But if it's a legal entity that added it, they can easily circumvent any attempt to eradicate it. Or, in a more extreme way, criminalize FOSS chat apps altogether, then the code will have to be analyzed in a RE environment. Maybe the non FOSS server code is where the backdoor is added. There are so many relatively hidden ways to compromise a chat app's supply chain.
I doubt any FOSS restriction is doable at all. As for the supply chain - xz showed this is indeed possible... But no one can guarantee that every encrypted client would be able to get such a well-hidden backdoor, and that it will stay undiscovered, and that it wouldn't be invalidated with an update... But yeah, the only way this can be combatted is having more eyes on such software.
I agree with you. I just think "they" will take that fact and just sit with it. I think "they" will do everything they can to get multiple backdoors in there (and I use the term 'backdoor' loosely to mean anything that can programmatically circumvent the encryption). There are more of them, in terms of power and funding, than there are of us. They will eventually succeed, if only for short times each interval. That's why I wrote that the solution is a chat revolution. I don't know what that will look like, but we need something they can't successfully attack.
I would never comply with Chat Control
Honestly, neither will I. No one should.
You will be surprised to learn not everyone lives in the EU ;)
There will be a ton of great privacy services that will be unaffected or will just leave the EU market (including signal). No need to switch to a completely unproven chat.