I would like to express concern about the future of the Signal messenger. Although Signal currently has a significantly smaller audience than WhatsApp, there are existential risks associated with the messenger covering a larger number of users. Is it rational to say that the goal of this messenger is to be used by the largest number of users, so let’s assume for a moment that Signal was able to achieve its mission and most WhatsApp users switched to Signal - I know this is right now unrealistic, but even 30% of users would be an enormous, huge number. Thus, what is the future of the messenger when it starts organizing communications for 1 billion users worldwide?

Would it be rational to assume that counterintelligence forces and special police will send their agents to the organization as undercover workers to sabotage the work and embed backdoors during companies in the context of company growth and staff expansion in this scenario? The question is rhetorical.

I would like to hear the response of the company’s president to this existential threat, and to thank for their work.

        • cookie019@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Hi, look, even considering that this question do not have relation to post’s subject I would suppose that if you are going to discuss this external threat (from users) I would begin from os level, not from dns level…

          So I am not interested right now in this question, with respect

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 days ago

    Signal Foundation is a nonprofit in California, and they are the ones that operate the relays and maintain the FOSS app. Since they’re a regular 501©3 and not a religious org, you can look into how their money is spent (to see if it’s going to any suspicious recipients) and whether they’re getting suspiciously large sums of money.

    On top of that, they don’t have access to the communication data itself. It’s all E2EE, and the app being FOSS means you can inspect how that data is encrypted and sent (and even build your own from source, if you’re paranoid). Even if they’re unknowingly hiring covert bad actors, it’s unlikely their activities would stay hidden for long.

    So while it’s certainly a concern that it’s still centralized messaging, it’s probably one of the best options due to the easy access for most people. Other than a billionaire buyout or government laws that force backdoors into encryption, the only real existential threat they currently face is operation costs. They were fortunate to have wealthy philanthropists in the beginning, but if they have an explosion in users (unlikely), it might bring the organization to its knees.

    I don’t find your particular scenario to be worrisome. And if it turns out that it’s compromised in the future, there’s other good apps out there, like SimpleX.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yep, and I think there’s a third option that I can’t recall at the moment (not Matrix), but no matter what, there’s alternatives that work and could be made to fit people’s chat needs.

    • cookie019@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Hi, what about gnu linux xz utils backoor scenario? Also is there any regular auditing of signal by third party auditing company?

      About simplex its not allowed in my threat model, I will rather use pure xmpp protocol with omem as an alternative.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Hi, what about gnu linux xz utils backoor scenario?

        This was caught by the community thanks to it being FOSS, and it was somewhat distinct from the scenario we’re talking about here, since the repository was wholly taken over by a bad actor who tricked the original (burnt out) maintainer to hand over the repo.

        Could a bad actor get their claws in and take over the repo? Possibly, but given the fact that it’s maintained by a foundation with lots of devs and not just one thankless hobbyist, that likelihood is probably small.

        Also is there any regular auditing of signal by third party auditing company?

        Regular? I don’t know. They have been audited, iirc, and they have received numerous legal requests to turn over data to courts, to which they’ve been able to reply “what data?” Bear in mind that they would almost certainly not do this if it meant jeopardizing their entire business. No business is going to go to jail for us, after all.

        You do what you feel is appropriate for your threat model, but as far as general threats to privacy or Signal’s existence go, I’m not currently concerned about their future.

        • cookie019@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Hi, I think you not really understood threat that I published -undercover agents -developers that will apply for the job at signal and receive it, and they will do their backdoor without Signal foundation knowing,its obvious. About audites that you mentioned - could you provide some link to it?

  • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Do you really think government/counter agents aren’t already doing this?

    Any security agency that wasn’t aware of it before even we were, with projections of likely growth path, who else is looking at it, etc, etc, wouldn’t be a very effective security agency.

    Keep in mind that this is what I can think of off the top of my head, and I’m not an intelligence/security boffin.

    Also, capitalization, punctual, etc are a thing for a reason… If you can’t be bothered then people won’t take you seriously. Is it really that hard to press shift as needed?

  • foremanguy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Signal is not a company, so in that case since it’s Open Source they shouldn’t be able to implement real hidden backdoors

    • cookie019@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Signal is non profit company, so my term is correct, being open source doesnt meant be secure and be immutable to internal divertions - see linux xz utils backdoor + thay rent amazon servers

        • cookie019@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Hello, Could you point to me some specialists who reguralry check all the server code and app code concretely? And publish the result. So I can follow their eyes

          • pogodem0n@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Unfortunately, no. My assertion came from sheer popularity of their GitHub repositories and personal observation among my tech-savvy friend groups.

            You can start checking out their code yourself, though. There are a lot of open-source software out there and it would be unfeasible for anyone to audit their code themselves. At some point, you’ll have to put some trust into others. Be it software audit companies, or the Signal developers.

            • cookie019@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yes, usually I trust audit companies like Cure53 but if I understand correctly there werent any audits for tge ladt years… I only know that Snowden has recommended that 5 years ago I think, of cource he deserve trust but since then he didnt say anything about it if I remember. Probably he also did some audit that moment 5 years ago but not full audit because it seems impossible for one person…