Is there any actual easy to use foss chat app my friends and SO could use ? Everyone uses fb messenger because its so easy. I cant find anything easy enough to make people switch to, that won't have issues and send them running back to zucc

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] JoeBidet@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

by "FOSS" you mean compatible with the core values of free/libre software?

This rules out Signal because: 1/ some of its server software is proprietary 2/ they dont allow you to communicate with "their" users if you want to run the server software yourself 3/ the prevented authors of free/libre software in the past to distribute their software (find a fdroid/signal thread) 4/ in practice they channel their users through their centralized servers hosted on AWS

(and that's without evoking their questionable funding, and long lasting commitment to make all their users identifiable through phone number, 10+y after US generals declared "we kill people based on metadata"....)

Simplex seems to me like the one really ticking all the boxes.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

and long lasting commitment to make all their users identifiable through phone number

They've had usernames for a good while now...

[–] JoeBidet@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

usernames is just for users. it is just a display thing. Signal still require that you use a phone# to sign up, and that you keep owning and paying for that SIM over the years in order to be able to verify it at random intervals...

despite being a very anti-privacy feature (esp. from a US company, funded initially bu US gov, who still forces its users to have their metadata stored on a US cloud...), it is also very much anti-user as in many cases around me, people who opened Signal accounts with some SIM card some day later traveled abroad, changed life, etc... and one day were asked to verify their account. (this is in some case what prompted their migration towards other communication networks...)

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Signal still require that you use a phone# to sign up

Your statement was that phone numbers make users identifiable. If they don't have my phone number, how can they use it to identify me?

and that you keep owning and paying for that SIM over the years

I don't know if you've noticed but it's nearly impossible to exist without a SIM these days. You can't even access your bank account remotely. But I suppose you only have a home phone and don't have internet access outside of WiFi?

in order to be able to verify it at random intervals...

in many cases around me, people who opened Signal accounts with some SIM card some day later traveled abroad, changed life, etc... and one day were asked to verify their account.

You're lying. You don't need to verify it at "random intervals", you only need it once when you initially sign up. You're just spreading misinformation at this point.

despite being a very anti-privacy feature

It's not, but please do elaborate.

funded initially bu US gov

You know what else is funded by the gov? TOR. But I suppose that's compromised as well? Which also compromises many of the messengers using the TOR network?

I don't support phone # verification, but they do have valid reasons for it, and it doesn't compromise the service at all, as you claim, because the only things tied to your phone number is:

When you first registered
When you last connected.

Which isn't really super useful information to the gov. And in order to get that info they have to ALREADY HAVE YOUR #. Which, of course, they do already have everyone's #. It's not exactly private information.

[–] JoeBidet@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You’re lying.

Thanks! :)

But no. Happened to several friends of mine, out of the blue: phone# verification to their signal account. Therefore when accusing people of lying... you are lying! :)

It's not just about "having your phone number", it is indeed relating it to the phone numbers of all the people you interact with, and (at least) processing these data in the RAM of amazon servers while promising they do not use or store it. It is strongly identifying "strong selector" metadata that is incompatible with the protection of users' privacy.

You can call me a lier, but you better check your sources.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

it is indeed relating it to the phone numbers of all the people you interact with

Please provide evidence when you make such wild claims.

[–] JoeBidet@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Evidence is: Signal still requires a phone# that is your unique identifier. Thus when connecting two parties, it is bound to have identifying metadata about them. (and that Signal still operates within AWS cloud, and is bound by US law: FISA, Patriot Act, etc.) How much more than this do you need?

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Evidence is: Signal still requires a phone#

This does not even remotely resemble evidence.

Thus when connecting two parties, it is bound to have identifying metadata about them

No it isn't.

(and that Signal still operates within AWS cloud, and is bound by US law: FISA, Patriot Act, etc.)

There's no law in existence that requires them to store metadata or hand anything over to the feds. They have been subpoenaed several times and it always comes out the same: the only data they have is what I detailed above. Even if they DO have it (which they don't) they don't provide it, which is effectively the same thing.

How much more than this do you need?

Literally anything legitimate.

[–] JoeBidet@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There’s no law in existence that requires them to store metadata or hand anything over to the feds. They have been subpoenaed several times and it always comes out the same: the only data they have is what I detailed above. Even if they DO have it (which they don’t) they don’t provide it, which is effectively the same thing.

It is just enough that this metadata be handled within the computing environment of Amazon. Their refusal for anyone use their own server and federate with "their" (as in captive) users also prevents anyone for using it in any other way...

If you dont see that Signal requires that its users use a strong-selector phone# in order to use the service, there is nothing i can do for you.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

If you're unable to explain or provide evidence as to why any of that is problematic, there's nothing I can do for you.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Authorities don't need to ask Signal for metadata; Signal promises they don't log any themselves and that is probably true.

But, they outsource their server operation to Jeff Bezos, and then they do some absurd security theater to pretend that cryptography makes it so that the server (Amazon) couldn't possibly log metadata - which is obviously false.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago

You think Bozos has access to information that Signal does not?