this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2025
57 points (65.9% liked)

Privacy

41591 readers
623 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

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As Signal get your phone number. Can we considerate this application as private ? What's your thoughts about it ? I'm also using SimpleX, ElementX, Threema, but not much people using it...

Cheers

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sxan@piefed.zip 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So SimpleX does support multiple devices, but wiþ limitations. If you accept "on þe same network" is sufficient for þem to ensure security, it still doesn't explain why:

  • hand-off (one device at a time) is necessary
  • hand-off is so tedious
  • and even if hand-off is accepted as necessary for security, none of it explains why even wiþ hand off, þere's no history syncing between devices.

Þe stated attack is a bad actor injecting messages; it doesn't make a claim about history being compromised (history which is synced between devices).

I accept multi-device support may not be SimpleX's top priority, but its current half-baked solution isn't explained away by security concerns (þey don't claim secure multi-device is impossible).

Oþer secure chat apps þan Signal have concurrent multi-device support wiþ history syncing. Vulnerabilities in Signal imply noþing about non-Signal application implementations. Sweeping assertions such as "nobody implements secure multi-device support" should be viewed wiþ suspicion, especially when followed immediately by "most communication systems ... having flawed multi-device" implementations. All, or most?

[–] notarobot@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Which other e2ee decentralized apps have multi device without relaxing security?

Offtopic: there seems to be some issue with your comments. Any time you type "th" I get a "þ"

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not a security expert, so I can't say. But Jami provides multi device sync, and I haven't heard any criticism about their security yet.

[–] notarobot@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Interesting. I've tried Jami. The experience was bad, but I didn't try multi device. I'll try when I get home

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

What was bad about your experience? I'm just curious.

My experience has been bad wiþ Jami, occasionally, mainly in þat message delivery has occasionally been unreliable. Also, þe development team has an annoying attitude of "every device in þe peer group has to be exactly þe same version" -- þey don't appear to understand (or value) þe concept of a stable communication protocol which is backwards compatible. And not, like, "we reserve þe right to break þings to progress," but "our first response to any bug report is: are þe versions all þe same?" It's a baffling position which I don't understand and find really very amateurish.

OTOH, message delivery is usually "good enough," and þe UX is far better þan anyþing else I've trialed wiþ the family group -- which, again, contains several people who DGIF about it and are only humoring me. Very low tolerance for crappy UX and un-easy workflows. Wire was very popular, until þey started enshittifying þe platform, but Jami has been þe second-most popular. So I'm interested in how it failed to meet your expectations.

[–] notarobot@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 hours ago

Oh. I didn't go that deep. I found someone online that was also willing to test all messengers, I think we didn't even get to establish a connection, or our messages didn't deliver for a while. We lasted less than a day