- cross-posted to:
- privacy@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@programming.dev
I currently use Telegram for my friends and family, but have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the UK Government is either reaching agreement for backdoors with messaging services, or is trying its hardest to.
I’m also on Element/Matrix. Before I try to get my contacts to join me on there, should I be aware of any privacy issues or is that a good place to head?
You must log in or register to comment.
Is Briar any good?
I currently use Telegram for my friends and family
Telegram is probably the worst thing you could use, it doesn’t encrypt messages by default and they are stored on Telegram’s servers, so they can read them at any time.
I’m also on Element/Matrix. Before I try to get my contacts to join me on there, should I be aware of any privacy issues
Yes, Matrix leaks a bunch of metadata and doesn’t have post-quantum encryption.
The best option is to use Signal. It uses end-to-end encryption by default for everything: Normal chats, group chats, voice and video calls and even stories. Messages are only stored on their servers (in encrypted format, so they can’t access them) until you receive them, after which they are promptly deleted and only stored on your device. And Signal has much better metadata protection than Matrix. The UX is also much better and less confusing, making onboarding new users much easier.
But you should also be aware that Signal does not federate, so the company can be bought. They have control over all accounts and the servers, without easy way to migrate away again. So it might just be another trap.
Try to use federated services (like matrix), they are more robust against hostile take overs.
Shortcut question: What’s a workable federated e2ee solution that’s available today? Quantum secure? Metadata secure?
so the company can be bought
The company (Signal Messenger LLC) is fully owned by Signal Foundation, a 501©3 non profit organization.
Try to use federated services
I generally like this idea, and I also use federated services for things like social media, that’s why we’re having a discussion here on Lemmy. But it introduces some issues with private messaging, like lack of reliability, which sucks if you want to use Matrix as your primary messenger, as well as metadata leaks. Federation is not always the answer, and in my opinion definitely not when it comes private and secure messaging.
they are more robust against hostile take overs
Probably around 80-90% of Matrix users are on the matrix.org homeserver, so it’s absolutely not as decentralized and resilient as you think it is.
The company (Signal Messenger LLC) is fully owned by Signal Foundation, a 501©3 non profit organization.
OpenAI is also non-profit. Not really an argument.
Probably around 80-90% of Matrix users are on the matrix.org homeserver, so it’s absolutely not as decentralized and resilient as you think it is.
Well, the goal is that moving to your own server, will not mean that you will loose access to all your contacts. Which makes moving instances much simpler. If Matrix gets a hostile take-over, your don’t really need to reach a critical mass for an alternative server.
At least (to my knowledge) the Signal messages are decrypted on the client end, so buying the company doesn’t give them automatic access to messages.
Having said that, I’m sure a hostile new owner could update the app to decrypt and then send the messages as plaintext to the servers if they wanted…
Well, you can still insert client side decryption into the app.
But it isn’t really about the messages, it is about the control of the servers and the accounts. You cannot easily move away from their servers, because you will lose your contacts. This gives the people controlling the servers power over you. A sort of vendor lockin.
In the 1990s US ISPs would “give you” an e-mail account with their service: you@isp.com. Of course, this is insta-lockin for that e-mail address, you can never port it.
Owning your own domain name and running e-mail service through that worked, for a few years, but the big players have made whitelist / blacklist such a frustrating whack-a-mole game in the e-mail space that running your own e-mail server quickly became impractical.
Well, you can still insert client side decryption into the app.
That’s why all clients are fully open-source. You can also use a fork like Molly.
AFAIK, Signal does not want anyone to use alternative clients, has that changed?
As far as I know moxie, signals lead dev, considers only the use of the officially build and distributed client authorized to use their servers.
So if they ever manage to detect someone using their services with an alternative client, they might delete your account.
telegram is not encrypted e2e
The most privacy focused messaging app I know is SimpleX Chat, it has no user IDs, is FOSS, e2e encrypted with an option to use TOR, give it a try!
Simplex was bubbling about implementing CSAM. Any client mentioning it is not safe, period… Child safety and hate speech is always an excuse for tolitarian regimes ( sittenpolizei ) never a true approach for solving the issue ( child safety )
I have no idea about this, but as of now anyone can register.
For reference, CSAM is Belgium’s government portal and a system of login, as far as I know, so I assume it would be used to check if someone is a minor at the time of registration
Child safety is important but implementing this would kind of defeat the purpose of a privacy focused app.
I agree that just gatekeeping children and therefore verifying everyone with a government platform, but then it raises the question on how to improve child safety on an app that’s self-hostable with not even user IDs to identify the users?
I don’t have an answer to that, but I don’t like just saying “This solution is bad”, I always try to add “So try this instead, because XXX”
+1 for SimpleX
hello beautiful people of lemmy I’m excited to make my first comment in here
so I wanted to ask: considering that WhatsApp is a big threat to privacy and even worse because of google and iOS backups, how big of an improvement would it be not using it and using the secret chat option in telegram instead? That would solve the issue wouldn’t it? As far as I know the concern is with normal non encrypted conversations and the groups channels and all those.
I would love to use signal with everyone but where I live it seems that there is 0 worries about the topic so I only use it with my more “international” people. The most I can get is probably to use telegram E2EE.
Hello and welcome to the Fediverse.
Telegram’s secret chat’s encryption algorithm is made by Telegram themselves, which is already a red flag. You generally don’t want to roll out your own encryption algorithm if you aren’t cryptographers, which Telegram people aren’t. Their MTProto is also not proven, so you’d rather not want to use it.
Here’s a blog entry about their MTProto: https://web.archive.org/web/20180420061726/http://unhandledexpression.com/2013/12/17/telegram-stand-back-we-know-maths/
My response to the body of this post is https://www.privacyguides.org/en/real-time-communication/
This might address the URL of this post (I’ve never interacted with “iCloud” so I don’t necessarily know what would be a good replacement for it): https://www.privacyguides.org/en/document-collaboration/
Telegram is the worst kind of “secure” messaging in that it gives you a false sense of security while not really being secure.
Telegram is the least secure thing there is. Not only it’s complete zero effort security, it’s also much above zero effort to advertise itself as almost secure. Not a good combination as you know.
The biggest issue with Matrix is that the server collects ALL the metadata. If that’s your server, that’s fine. If thats the default matrix.org server that almost everyone uses, you might as well be using WhatsApp. Same thing goes if any of those people are conversing with people on your server, as they will store all redundant metadata on their server as well.
Signal is easier to use, more private, and faster.
Signal requires a phone number on setup.
Also, matrix has bridges, which alone make it worthwhile for me. They, of course, don’t help privacy, but they are so so nice for convenience.
Matrix is definitely slow though, and a grand majority of the clients are heavy terrible buggy electron apps. There are a few good ones ( nheko and the new beeper clients ), but even they have some rough edges.
I still use matrix all the time and love it.
If max privacy was the goal I think simplex looks wonderful. No required info for sign up, no way for them to possibly collect any metadata ( because there are no identifiers sent over internet for anyone at all ), E2EE, and decentralized.
I’ve been trying SimpleX a little this week. It hasn’t been great, unfortunately. It could be an iOS issue, but notifications aren’t coming through. Maybe Android will be better.
On iOS, I had best experience using element X, so far
I absolutely love Element X. Synapse has been low maintenance to self-host, as well. Win-win.
Signal requires a phone number on setup.
It is dumb and annoying and inconvenient but doesn’t affect its use or privacy.
I do agree that SimpleX seems like the best chat option.
It creates a cost for spammers. They have to have an account with a Telco, which isn’t free, which in a lot of countries comes with some sort of National ID to register. That’s the reason.
Lol, let me introduce you to http://smspva.com/
No they don’t, you can sign up with a VoIP provider.
It affects its use for me definitely. I don’t want to have a phone number. At all.
How do you even exist without a phone number. How do you get cellular data? Does the government not require you to have one? Your employer? What about all the services that require one?
To be clear, I have a phone number, but I do not WANT to have one. Most aspects of my life I have removed my phone number from. There are still a few services ( like signal! ) which requires one, and I cope. Cellular data is also something worth avoiding, from a privacy perspective. It is very possible to live a life where you’re never very far from wifi, especially in a city. I do not currently do this, but would love to one day.
How is public wifi more secure than mobile internet?
For both, you need minimum a VPN connection outha there (to your home ideally, where you are in control of filters etc.) to get some privacy.
Mobile data you pay a service provider for and link all of your information to ( address, name, etc ), and can be used by one company to track your location at any time with very high accuracy as long as you are near 3 cell towers. Public wifi gets no information about you other than your MAC address and that you’re currently within it’s range. There is no central body that can track all your movements. You could, theoretically, buy prepaid data plans to minimize the info they know about you, but then you have to buy a new one each month, and there’s STILL one company tracking all your movements each month, though they don’t really know who YOU are. They could still do traffic analysis to figure that out.
It’s not that it’s less secure, it’s that it’s worse for privacy.
Also, messaging over SMS / MMS is awful for security, which I lump in with the rest of this conversation. https://youtu.be/wVyu7NB7W6Y
I have to wonder if you could use a burner number and just disable it after setting up your username
I have created a telegram account like that. No username. The number does not exist anymore. It’s been working as intended for the past 6 years or so.
I think you’d have a theoretical issue if the next person who got that number also tried to set up a signal account.
You might be right. I’ll have to go double check, but I don’t think that you can just set up a new account with the same number without the password you set up.
I might be wrong, though.
You can enable a registration lock, where anyone with your number would have to enter a pin to register an account with it. However, it removes itself if you don’t log in for a while.
Sure but it allows VOIP numbers. I’m using a jmp.chat number with it just fine.
Good to know!
Is the phone number required for 2fa codes or anything like that at any point ?
I got an initial verification code and haven’t heard from signal since. Signal doesn’t support totp or SMS 2fa. But has a pin code set along with your password. A new device that is added doesn’t have access to old messages unless you have the correct seed key iirc
Signal requires a phone number on setup.
Not anymore.
You can choose to share a username instead of a phone number, but they still require the phone number at setup iirc.
True.
Then your point…?
Yes it does
You’re right. Only for setup though, which is something I guess.
How to Use Signal WhatsApp Without Phone Number?
As mentioned above, a valid phone number that can receive calls and text messages is required to create and verify your Signal Account.
Since, your mobile device does not have a phone number or you do not want to use your phone number, you can use a Landline Phone Number or a Virtual Phone Number as provided by TextNow, Google Voice and others to verify your Signal Account.
Once the account verification process is completed, you will be able to use Signal on your mobile device, regardless of whether or not it has a phone number or SIM card installed on it.
Signal is easier to use, more private, and faster.
Unfortunately, it is also effectively tied to Google services due its app distribution and push notification channels on Android (which most people on Signal use), and as a centralised service, it is vulnerable to shutdown or network-level metadata monitoring by anyone with sufficient access/influence at Signal or their data center provider (such as a government who doesn’t like encrypted messaging).
(Edit: rephrased for clarity)
You can use Molly, a fork of Signal for android. It offers an alternative for push notifications.
Yep, I run my own mollysocket + ntfy server.
Essentially, molly socket functions as another device, when it recieves a notif, it pings your specified unified push server, which then queues up a notification for the ntfy app on your device.
You don’t need to run your own unified push server, and can just use one of the main ones, but I figured I might as well.
I personally have them hosted on fly.io for free via the legacy hobby plan.
Now all I need to do is get more of my friends to message me on it 🤣
I personally have them hosted on fly.io for free via the legacy hobby plan
Here’s the link for anyone who’s interested: https://github.com/pcrockett/mollysocket-fly
Huh I didn’t know this existed. Will compare it to mine later
Oh that’s the only one I know of. I thought that this is what you’re referring to.
Nah I rolled my own and didn’t publish it so that’s probably why haha.
Have you been using this one?
On my app I don’t get rich notifications only “you may have a new message”. Havent looked into it at all though, only set this up like last weekLol there is a setting in molly itself for rich notifs
it’s also effectively tied to Google services due to the app distribution
It’s been recently added to FDroid.
and push notification channels
You can use NTFY with Molly (which has been on FDroid for some time).
network-level metadata monitoring by anyone with sufficient access/influence at Signal or their data center provider (such as a government who doesn’t like encrypted messaging).
This one is just a straight-up lie. Everything on the server is encrypted and no one has the keys except the participants.
It’s been recently added to FDroid.
No, it has not. A third party published it in an f-droid compatible repository. That might be convenient for someone who happens to trust that third party and manually add it to their F-Droid client, but it is not at all like it being added it to F-Droid.
You can use NTFY with Molly (which has been on FDroid for some time).
This does not refute what I wrote. Unless you only communicate with people who get their Signal app from some non-Google source and they all rig up alternative push notification channels, or every one of them uses Signal exclusively on iOS, your conversations are still tied to Google. Perhaps you have so few contacts that you could achieve that, but most people are not in that position.
network-level metadata monitoring by anyone with sufficient access/influence at Signal or their data center provider (such as a government who doesn’t like encrypted messaging).
This one is just a straight-up lie. Everything on the server is encrypted and no one has the keys except the participants.
Encryption doesn’t hide network traffic. Signal’s centralised design means there is a single point where that traffic can be monitored and traced to reveal which endpoints are talking to each other, and where, and when.
What I wrote is not a lie, which you would know if you actually understood these issues. Please stop making baseless accusations. You are wrong, and you are being very rude.
If you’re interested in correcting your ignorance, I suggest starting with this paper, which touches on some of the issues:
https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/improving-signals-sealed-sender/
If the paper is too much for you, the linked video does a pretty good job of explaining.
Their github releases have the apk available so you can manually download it and install it or use obtainium.
It’s also available on their website btw: https://signal.org/android/apk/
your conversations are still tied to Google
That’s simply false. Signal Notifications never include the content of the message or any metadata, no matter if they’re sent over FCM, APN, WebSockets or UnifiedPush (via mollysocket). That wouldn’t even be possible, since the Signal server sending out the notification doesn’t even have the key to decrypt the message. Only the users involved in the conversation have the keys, that’s how end-to-end encryption works. Signal simply sends an empty message via FCM (or any other push system), and the Signal app on your device then receives and decrypts the encrypted message and shows you a preview of the message content as a notification on your operating system.
And every build of the Signal client for WhatsApp also supports WebSockets as a fallback push notification system, in case Play services aren’t installed or can’t be reached. The only reason why FCM is used by default is that it saves some battery, because it only maintains one background network connection for all apps, instead of each app handling notifications themselves.
I would be more concerned about how phone-oriented it is. A phone’s default OS is such spyware that I am not sure just what is safe from from being uploaded. And even if the person wants a more private alternative, most phones have locked bootloaders. On the other hand, Linux would run on damn near anything… But using Signal on it without a smartphone is very annoying. No way my mom would understand an Android VM or a command-line client, because the desktop client isn’t feature-full and doesn’t even allow registration.
Removed by mod
I’ve honestly found signal better than matrix.
Matrix is just not there yet in terms of features UI etc and is less private than signal because it collects way more metadata and stuff. I know the idea of federation is cool, but Signal works better for the privacy aspect.
I’m using simplex :3
Interesting—I feel like I see Matrix touted as more private than Signal b/c of Signal’s phone number requirement. What compromising metadata does Matrix require that Signal does not?
Sorry I’ll let someone more knowledgeable answer about metadata, but signal does allow you to set a username and hide your phone number (so people add you with username instead if f number)
The downside of Signal is that it’s centralized, and thus at the whim of those who run it. Structurally, it’s not really different from Whatsapp or Telegram except for who owns it.
it’s not really different from Whatsapp or Telegram
That’s not true. WhatsApp is fully proprietary and Telegram doesn’t use E2EE by default. And even if you enable it, they use a weak encryption protocol.
I don’t think that’s a fair comparison, simply because their structures are quite different. Signal is FOSS run by a 501©3 non-profit, whereas Whatsapp is obviously run by Meta and data mines its users; Telegram is also a nonprofit, but privacy was never their goal or mission.
They’re all centralized, which I agree is a negative, but if something must be centralized, being run by a nonprofit foundation whose mission is privacy and E2EE is about the best option you could hope for in that scenario.
There should be a difference between using Whatsapp while in a county with good privacy laws (like one of the EU member) or one without.
As far as I know Meta only collects and abuses data it get’s from people where there are now laws in place to prevent it (so why wouldn’t they do it).
We should normalise the audits on security and privacy that are done by proper accountants. It doesn’t help that a lot of people call bookkeepers accountants which isn’t correct, but a signature from an accountant (CPA/AA/RA or whatever) should have some impact to prove the services are secure or private.
As far as I know Meta only collects and abuses data it get’s from people where there are now laws in place to prevent it (so why wouldn’t they do it).
Unfortunately, in practice, the laws don’t seem to mean much to the wealthy.
Like other gigantic companies that have billions of dollars, it’s easier and more profitable to ask forgiveness than permission; paying legal fines that are 0.01% of their overall profits is just the cost of doing business. Zuck has been caught on multiple occasions skirting the law (see the most recent revelation of them surreptitiously leeching scores of books from Anna’s Archive and a previous one of partnering with Cambridge Analytica, for example).
I’m all good with having companies submit to hostile financial audits, but I’m not sure how a CPA would be qualified to validate security or privacy. Code security audits should be done by cryptographic experts, and I think you would need both.
Perhaps one day, we’ll have Certified Public Cryptographers that have a fiduciary duty to ensure people are secure or private.
Like openai and proton?
We are still in a trust me bro situation… We just trust signal bro more than meta bro.
Iirc Proton has been audited for security and for privacy as well.
We have systems in place to help with it
We are still in a trust me bro situation
No we’re not. You don’t have to trust Signal, everything is open source, you can actually verify it.
Sorta like those. Anybody that thought OpenAI was trustworthy just by virtue of being a nonprofit gets what they deserve for being so credulous, and Proton isn’t directly comparable, because it’s a stack of software, not just one. You would have to compare the analog of Signal, and Proton doesn’t have one.
If what you really want to say is that we don’t know with 100% certainty that the Signal Foundation is operating in good faith, then I agree, though they seem to have a pretty decent track record thus far.
However, that doesn’t mean their software doesn’t do what is expected (it’s FOSS, go inspect and build it yourself), and E2EE ensures that even if they suddenly wanted or were ordered to turn anything over, the data LEOs get would be limited, if it exists at all.
We are still in a trust me bro situation… We just trust signal bro more than meta bro.
I’m not sure what you think is especially noteworthy here. It’s always some level of a “trust me bro” situation. That’s how the internet works. If you want to avoid trust issues, stop using the internet.
I currently use Telegram for my friends and family, but have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the UK Government is either reaching agreement for backdoors with messaging services, or is trying its hardest to.
Unless you start an encrypted chat, Telegram chats are not E2E.
I’m also on Element/Matrix. Before I try to get my contacts to join me on there, should I be aware of any privacy issues or is that a good place to head?
Host your own Matrix node, and then you don’t have to worry about prying eyes. Realistically, instead of worrying about the protocol, worry about the content of the text. Use PGP to encrypt your own text and send it over clearnet. Who cares at that point.
Definitely host your own node! It’s trivial for a server admin to add a hidden bot to every chat and while it’s still E2EE, an unknown party could still have a copy and key to read it.
Really good talk from DEFCON 32 about the service “Anom” by Joseph Cox (sorry for the lack of a link, at lunch, on mobile and about to get back to work).
Matrix is good for private general messaging. The fact that it’s decentralised means it can also withstand things like government-ordered shutdowns or back doors, since there is no central point that controls the whole network.
Two things to be aware of:
- Some non-message bits (e.g. room topic text and membership) have not yet been moved to the encrypted channel, so those could be read by the administrator of a homeserver that participates in your chat room. Since most people care primarily about keeping the message content private, this is an acceptable trade-off to get all the things that Matrix offers.
- The upcoming Matrix 2.0 features and design choices simplify the UI and fix some occasional errors. It might be worth waiting until this stuff officially lands in the client apps before bringing your contacts to Matrix, for a better experience all around.
As long as you onboard them with the ElementX/SchildichatNext(better fork of element) mobile client, their experience and setup should be fairly future proof. Its still changing and growing for sure but the most important stuff is finally working now and the new call systems is a huge improvement.
But yeah if you want zero metadata, your only choice is P2P stuff like Briar.
Government-ordered shutdowns do not work the way you think. Government doesn’t play by the rules, it makes rules for itself.
Which means - they may, say, make a list of instances updated hourly, which automatically get blocked by ISPs.
Free speech or not, it won’t withstand such.
Note that I said the network can withstand such things, not that it guarantees your connectivity to it when using a hostile ISP. No internet messaging service can do that.
Are there any other messaging options that are more resistant to government ordered shutdowns than Matrix?
Something p2p like Tox or Briar, both annoying for daily use.
There are a few messaging systems that don’t rely on internet service. That usually means a peer-to-peer design using some form of radio link, which can work well for local gatherings (like protests), but these tend to be impractical for general use.
Gotcha, so in summary, anything that relies on an internet service, such as Signal, Matrix, or Simplex, is vulnerable to government ordered blocks via black list that ISPs are compelled to enforce. Am I thinking of this right?
Thankfully, it’s not that simple.
A centralised service is an easy target for a government. (This is where Signal stands.) A decentralised one is significantly harder, because the government would have to be constantly discovering and processing every node in the network as new ones appear. (This is where Matrix stands, although it doesn’t have many public servers yet.) Fully peer-to-peer decentralisation makes it harder still, because there are as many nodes as there are users, with network addresses that often change. (Some of these exist today, but are mostly experimental with few users. Matrix has done some proof-of-concept work in this area as well.)
On top of decentralisation, tunnels like VPN and Tor can be helpful in avoiding ISP-imposed blocks.
I think at this point it would be funnier to just use something obviously unsecure like discord but share your public key with the other user and then send encrypted text.
We went full circle to the early 2000s, slapping PGP on top of public messaging platforms!
I used to do something like this before Signal became a thing. We used to use OTR via the Pidgin OTR plugin to send encrypted messages over Google Hangouts. Funnily enough, I’m pretty sure Pidgin supports Discord, so you could use the exact same setup to achieve what you described.
It was pretty funny to check the official Hangouts web client and see nonsensical text being sent.
I guess a vencord plugin for that wouldn’t be that difficult to do
No proprietary software can truley provide secure messaging
Matrix is not proprietary. The protocol is FOSS, Synapse server is FOSS, Dendrite server is FOSS, there are FOSS clients, Element is FOSS too afaik.
can confirm, element is foss
You may want SimpleX. You can still self-host your own server if you wish, but it doesn’t have nearly the metadata issues of matrix and encryption keys are stored in a database that you back up instead of constantly breaking
Last time I tried Simplex, the desktop app was incompatible with the mobile app. Do you know whether this has been fixed?
I haven’t personally tried it, but I think there’s a setting in the mobile app for using it with a desktop. So I assume it is fixed, but I won’t swear to it.
It works. You either have to link it with your mobile app or you use it standalone with a different user/id
