seirdy.one/content/notes/signal-security.md

---
title: "Signal security"
date: 2022-05-26T12:18:24-07:00
---
<aside role="note">
Reply to {{< mention-work itemprop="about" itemtype="SocialMediaPosting" reply=true >}}{{<cited-work name="europe wants to ban signal" url="https://disqordia.space/notice/AJqmgRLFlyVENIXcDA">}} by {{<indieweb-person name="chjara" url="https://tuxcrafting.online/" itemprop="author">}}
{{</mention-work>}}
</aside>

What do you mean by "false sense of security"? Signal's cryptography is pretty solid. It's one of the only messengers with such a lack of metadata leakage; if you combine it with Tor you can add enough noise to the network-layer metadata to be more private than almost any alternative.

Don't get me wrong, [I dislike it on the grounds of being a closed platform](../../../../../posts/2021/01/27/whatsapp-and-the-domestication-of-users/), but few alternatives exist that support both offline messaging and have such little metadata leakage. I'm willing to hear suggested alternatives that do not bake a "cryptographically-secure, decentralized pyramid scheme" (cryptocurrency) into the protocol. I'm not aware of any such alternative at the moment.