From 1e2a2439528ab499d755d005ffe773b07fc2705c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rohan Kumar Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 12:18:45 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] New note: signal security --- content/notes/signal-security.md | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) create mode 100644 content/notes/signal-security.md diff --git a/content/notes/signal-security.md b/content/notes/signal-security.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..66fbd04 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/notes/signal-security.md @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +--- +title: "Signal security" +date: 2022-05-26T12:18:24-07:00 +--- + + +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](https://seirdy.one/2021/01/27/whatsapp-and-the-domestication-of-users.html), 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.