this post was submitted on 11 May 2025
142 points (86.6% liked)

Privacy

37745 readers
848 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
 

I remember a time when visiting a website that opens a javacript dialog box asking for your name so the message "hi " could be displayed was baulked at.

Why does signal want a phone number to register? Is there a better alternative?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (19 children)

Jami.net

Ignore the comment saying signal is "end to end encrypted" "private" etc They are simply stuck in a delusional state where they try to convince themselves that signal is the best option so they can continue using it. Nothing is private if it isn't fully libre because you never know what the proprietary code is doing. The signal protocol itself has its source code released, and the encryption and security code is publicly available, but the signal Foundation has stated that it uses both free code and proprietary code. Their reason is UI, but it's hard to make sure whatever proprietary code is being used for because you simply can't see it. As GNU puts it: "You're walking in a pitch black cave". Jami is fully libre and is a GNU project. You don't even need any phone number!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 16 hours ago (10 children)

You should have visited Signal's github page first, I dunno. Before talking. Made up a lot of stuff.

They do have proprietary code for that crypto wallet they have there, well hidden, and for, eh, phone number registration, but other than that module it's all released, I think.

The server and the client applications are FOSS. You can host it for yourself, patching out the domain names and registration parts the way you like it more.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

That’s not the full picture. That's exactly the problem I was highlighting. The issue isn't whether some of the code is "FOSS", it’s about whether all of it is. If even small parts remain proprietary (as you mentioned), then we can’t verify what those parts are doing. And those parts could theoretically significantly affect the data collection. Also, I didn't make up a lot of stuff. The Signal Foundation themselves have confirmed that certain UI and build components are not fully libre. As the GNU project puts it, if part of your system is closed, then you're trusting a black box, no matter how well-lit the rest of it is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Signal protocol guarantees that what's on the server we can discard in your suspicions, it doesn't matter, because you are not trusting it.

The client is fully open.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

You are trusting the server, or do you verify the fingerprint of EVERY contact of yours? The normal people don't, as Signals UI purpusfully doesn't encourages it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Normal people don't anyway.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)