This blog post, and some of its comments are pretty interesting and concerning at the same time. Not really sure if in the end that means that nothing other than centralized controlled messaging can be as cryptography safe.

Any comments?

  • TechnicallyColors
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    As for the other reasons why Soatok thinks Signal is better, well those are cherry picked and highly opinionated

    In the Signal article yes, by design those are his opinions on what the minimum requirements are for “beating Signal”, which are not all objective truths. These articles come from a response to people evangelizing one messenger or another to him, some of which have “stronger” security but negatives in other places that make them unacceptable for widespread use (especially for non-techies). In the XMPP article I think the remaining points are very fair in terms of how the XMPP ecosystem works today.

    Signal is a snake-oil vendor

    Post-quantum encryption is an active R&D field with no proven to work solutions yet

    Okay, that’s enough of my time. These replies are for the benefit of others, and I hope I’ve said enough on that for people to make their judgments with more info that what you initially were responding with.