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

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

  • basic daydreams@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    as I see it, Signal tried to fit that privacy gap for a standard centralised messenger, if you think about it, that might have made it easier to non-tech-savvy people to adopt it (even if it was as a request from a contact), decentralisation is not remotely appealing to them

  • bigbrother@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Privacy: they know who you are but they don’t know what are you doing/when are you doing. Anonymity: they don’t know who you are.

  • Ardens@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I think it’s important to remember de difference between being private and being anonymous. Signal IS private. It’s not anonymous. The same is true for many other apps/services.

    Personally I like to be private. I don’t really need to be anonymous.

  • coconut@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    If you want to be mainstream a) you can’t have spammers, scammers, and all the other scum of the earth and b) finding your contacts in the app HAVE TO be plug and play. Literally no normie will bother adding with usernames or whatever.

    • Autonomous User@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      finding your contacts

      Wrong, it is not optional, does not stop spam and the worst way to try.

      Do not let this derail us. Escaping to libre software is the best return on investment.

  • XenGi@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    One of the design goals is that they don’t have a user database, so governments etc can’t knock down their door demanding anything. By using phone numbers your “contacts” are not on their servers but local on your phone.

    • rirus@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s WRONG they have a Database of every Phone number registered to them and metadata like the last time they logged in. You send all your contacts numbers to signal so they can respond who is also using Signal.

    • 0101100101@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      During registration they want a phone number to send a verification code. I know I am me. They don’t need to verify that.

      • krimson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        They do. Otherwise anyone can register with your phone number and start messaging as if they were you.

        If you want more privacy you’d need something like Simplex.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Signal’s internal identifiers are, of course, not phone numbers. And you can download their server and host it without requiring phone numbers for registration. Just they simply can’t afford it, they need to prevent bots from registering and sending messages somehow. A group message is stored in Signal as many times as there are group members, for example.

        • IttihadChe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          They need to verify using a phone number because otherwise other people could sign up using your phone number and pretend to be you? What?

          They can only sign up using your phone number if they do require a phone number. If they didn’t ask for a phone number then how would people sign up using your phone number?

  • 𞋴𝛂𝛋𝛆@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    They implemented an alt method IIRC but you must go out of your way to search and find it. I just recall seeing a bunch of post headlines about using email or something like that a year so so back.

    They send an initial SMS message that is a main expense and funded by some rich person and donations. I think that has some significance to encryption or something but I’m not sure of the details. I could be wrong on that one, it has been years since I read the details.

    • rirus@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Your wrong, except the rich person part. That rich guy is the WhatsApp founder, who got the money by selling their users to Facebook.

  • throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    My conspiracy theory brain goes:

    Its funded by the government.

    Yes, the messages themselves are encrypted, but they don’t need that, they have access to all the useful metadata.

    They can find everyone near the site of a protest (via cell tower data), then find their signal accounts, then see who they are contacting, potentially revealing who the the other protestors and protest organizers are.

    And if you need access to the messages, they don’t need to crack the encryption, they could just send pegasus to your phone (and they already have you phone number to do so), and they’ll have access to every message.

    Then they just find those other protestors, also send pegasus to their phones.

    I mean, the Signal code is technically legit, they just used a side channel (zero day exploits) to gain access.

    But this is just a theory, I don’t have any evidence supporting this hypothesis.

    • 0101100101@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      This is what the UK police do with WhatsApp data. Even though they can’t read the messages, they do use the connections of messages to suspicious characters as evidence including date and times, which also puts these other people in the spotlight, opening further investigations.

      The UK police can also use ‘stinger’ devices that are “fake” mobile data towers to intercept mobile communications.

    • ReluctantZen@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      They don’t need Signal to do any of this though, so this doesn’t seem like a very plausible theory.

      • throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        True, they don’t exact need signal. But the thing with exploits is that, once found, they would be patched and they can’t use the same exploit again. So they can’t just be sending everyone in the country Pegasus. That would make it easier for it to be detected.

        So with Signal’s help, they have a easier time to select a few targets. They can find out who is using Signal, and correlate that with other data like being near a protest site. Then they only need to target a few Signal users, instead of like sending Pegasus to 5000 protestors, they could find out that everyone is talking to this “John Smith” person, then send pegasus to that user and obtain a lot info And since its only few users being infected, its less likely for the fact that the conversations are comprpmised to be known.

        I mean, without requiring phone numbers for Signal, they would have a harder time knowing who is using Signal, and they would end up having to infect all 5000 phones in the protest area, which mean now its much more likely for the spyware to be detected. With infecting just a few of the organizers, their spying can remain undetected for a long time.

        As for everyone else not using Signal, they are likely to be using unencrypted messaging, so its not even necessary to infect their phones.

        • guy@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Why can’t they send Pegasus to everyone?

          If they can create a fund and invent Signal, they can just make Pegasus part of AOSP and have every manufacturer be forced to install it silently

          • throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            They could, but again, its easier to detect.

            But if we are already under the assumption that Pegasus is so sophisiticated that it’s un-detectable. Its possible all this privacy talk is futile and they already have access to every device, which means Graphene OS is also pointless.

            I honestly don’t know. If you are planning any anti-government activities, the only way to be totally safe is to not carry a smartphone (and obviously wear a mask to conceal your identity and all that) and use One Time Pad encryption and deaddrops for communications.

        • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Obviously Signal is the lesser evil, but don’t use Signal if you are planning a revolt is what I’m saying.

          or if you’re the US’ secretary of defense and you’re going to bomb Houthis

          🤷

          • throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            🤣 Absolute shitshow lmfao. Signal is not approved for war communications, that was a security breach (not to mention, adding the journalist), and he risked jepardizing his entire mission.

            But on the other hand, having such incompetent fascists is a good thing for the resistance.

  • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Bots. If it makes you feel better, you can disable other people finding you via phone number and just give them your username. All messages are private.

    • 0101100101@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      But the police request the meta data of all messages from your phone number that the company has and they’re required by law to give them it.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            People told you a few times to go look for yourself what Signal can give away. Its protocol descriptions are pretty understandable.

            The whole bloody reason it’s always recommended is because it’s absolutely the best thing in terms of yes, encrypting metadata. It’s state of the art, level above that bullshit you’re thinking.

            Unfortunately, that also means that hosting it takes lots of resources, which means they have to screen bots and mults somehow. Phone numbers are one way. Paid accounts are another.

            • 0101100101@programming.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Phone numbers are one way. Paid accounts are another.

              Rubbish. How would this stop bots? Bots are created to make money. What makes you think creators don’t have a phone number, or be prepared to pay to spam.

      • devfuuu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        You should go properly read the requests from law enforcement they have received and exactly what information it contains. It’s public. Then evaluate if it matters for yur threat model. Security doesn’t exist in a vaccum.

      • plz1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        They can “request” it all day long. Signal doesn’t store them beyond the time needed to deliver to the end user device, and while (temporarily) stored, it’s encrypted in a way Signal’s service cannot read.

        • solrize@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          The phone carrier at least here in the US is required to store the call data for 18 months, according to the one that I use.

            • solrize@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              The claim is that Signal’s phone verification step doesn’t cause privacy problems because Signal (purportedly) doesn’t retain the phone numbers after verification. That claim is falsified because the phone carrier stores the call record even if Signal doesn’t. They store it because of the same law that makes them turn it over to Big Brother on demand. The phone verification step is, therefore, a privacy problem. Obviously there are similar issues with IP routing, but at least I can use a VPN with an endpoint in another country.

              • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                No, that wasn’t the claim. Phone numbers are used for sign up, but the post’s OP was talking about messaging meta data. Messaging meta data doesn’t go through your carrier and is encrypted.

                If you check the publication of signal’s cases where they had to hand out data, and in reverse the FBI leak that listed analysis of all messenger apps by what data they were able to acquire in most cases, Signal came out as one of the top options.

              • plz1@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                The “record” is a SMS verification code. All that will tell the government is that you registered for Signal, nothing else.

                • solrize@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Telling the govt that you registered for Signal sounds like a bad failure as far as I’m concerned, e.g. if you are a user in a repressive regime. Do you think Trump would like to get his hands on a list of all the Signal users in the US? Probably yes. What would he do with the list? IDK but it has to be bad. So it should be an objective of Signal to make it impossible for anyone to create such a list.

                  Anyway, it sounds like Signal has wised up and is getting rid of the phone number requirement. I don’t understand why people here keep defending the misfeature. I’ve heard such things explained as “system justification” but I still don’t understand it. All of us make poor decisions all the time, but we should at least make some effort to recognize them, and fix them when possible.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_justification

        • 0101100101@programming.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          huh? so the phone number is encrypted in a way that can’t be read, but an sms is sent to the phone? … a separate company sends the text on behalf of signal? so that separate company logs the phone number, the timestamp and who knows what else.

          • plz1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Signal doesn’t use SMS at all, once you have enrolled. The phone number is used to validate people and exclude bots, during registration. As others have noted, you can hide your number from other users, as well.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            What are you on about right now? I don’t mean that sarcastically, I really am wondering what your concern is. Are you concerned that because your phone number is associated with Signal that police will know you use Signal?

          • xthexder@l.sw0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Signal doesn’t use SMS anymore, and all messages are sent over encrypted Internet protocol. Any servers in between won’t see the phone number, it’s not needed to deliver the message, it’s using an IP address at that point and the entire message metadata is encrypted. Signal is the only one that can see the phone numbers, which they use to identify multiple clients as a single user and route messages accordingly.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Reduce spam bot accounts and other malware, as well as to allow for user discovery so you can find your contacts more easily. It’s not designed to be an anonymous service, just a private one.

    • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not designed to be an anonymous service, just a private one.

      I think this needs to be said a lot more often and a lot louder. Anonymous and private are NOT necessarily the same thing, nor should the expectation be that they are. Both have a purpose.

  • Majestic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Because their founder (Marlinspike) is probably under a National Security Letter, maybe it’s just that, maybe he’s done some crimes they’re also holding over him. If you look at his behavior it’s that of someone very paranoid that they’re going to be found out to be cooperating with the feds and get hit with charges for not upholding the bargain, someone straddling one or two big lies that have to be maintained to keep their life going. Very controlling of things they should be open about if they care about privacy as they claim. But exactly the behavior of someone under an NSL who’s terrified of getting hit with charges for that and maybe other things but who is expected to front and run a purported privacy first messenger. The secrecy, the refusal to allow others to operate their own servers, the antagonism towards federation, the long periods without publishing source code updates.

    This doesn’t necessarily mean that signal message content is compromised, the NSA primarily scrapes metadata and would most care about knowing who is talking to who and to put real names to those people and building graphs of networks of people. Other things like what times they talk can be inferred from upstream taps on signals servers without their knowledge or cooperation via traffic observation and correlation especially when paired with the fourteen eyes global intercept network. With a phone number it’s also a lot easier to pinpoint an exact device to hack using a cooperating (or hacked) telecom. Phone numbers can also be correlated to triangulated positions of devices, see who in a leftist protest network was A) heavily sending messages and B) attended that protest and left last and begin to infer things about structure and particular relationships.

    And those saying it has to do with spam prevention, that’s kind of nonsense. First I still get the occasional spam, second a phone number that can receive a confirmation text is something all these criminal organizations have access to which the average person doesn’t. Third it’s possible to prevent spam just by looking for people (especially new accounts under 120 days old) sending very small amounts of messages (1-3) to a very large amount of other users especially in a short amount of time. Third there’s no reason to keep the phone number tied to the account, a confirmation text could be required with a promise to delete the phone number immediately after (would still be technically useful to the NSA though less useful for keeping track of people changing numbers or using a burner for this who might be higher value targets).

    • solrize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That is a pretty weird post that doesn’t make much sense, but I remember meeting Moxie and asking him about Android security and being surprised at how defensive he was about it. Is Signal the app he was working on? That helps somewhat. I get them confused with each other.

      The Signal app doesn’t appear to be on F-droid, which is a bit discomforting.

      • GrumpyDuckling@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I got one one time, been using it for years. Fuckin’ weird to try on people who are privacy and security conscious. My guess is that they were attempting to see what numbers are using signal in the first place if someone responds with a “fuck off” then the spammer knows they use signal.

      • sqgl@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I have exactly once as did a couple of my friends from the same stranger.

  • solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Is there a quick explanation of what signal actually does? I don’t understand the need for a phone number either. Jami doesn’t ask for a phone number. It has other deficiencies that make me not want to use it, but those are technical rather than policy, more or less. Similarly, irc (I’m luddite enough to still be using it) doesn’t ask for a phone number either. So this is all suspicious. There are a bunch of other things like this too (Element, Matrix, etc.) that I haven’t looked into and tbh I don’t understand why they exist.

    • devfuuu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not suspicious. It’s been talked about for years. People know exactly what the phone number is used for. Easy discoverability, quick and seamless onboarding of new users by providing a way to bootstrap their social graph, and it being very similar to the process of the other biggest player that people just understand. And spam prevention. The phones are not leaked or used for anything else. The other alternatives exist and you are welcome to onboard the people you want onto them if you think it’s simpler.

      The code is open, if you don’t trust other people and can’t read the code to understand then hire someone you trust to validate the claims and assure you. But spreading FUD and saying it’s suspicious is not productive to anyone.

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago
        1. I don’t understand what you mean about discoverability: is my presence on the network advertised to strangers and spammers? That doesn’t sound good. What does the onboarding process look like?

        2. You still haven’t said what Signal’s advantages are supposed to be over alternatives, though I can guess some (e.g. better/more crypto than irc has). Jami seems conceptually ok, but buggy in implementation. Nextcloud Talk works but is kind of clunky. Matrix is popular though I’ve never used it: is it the main alternative to Signal these days? I thought it was what all the hipsters had migrated to while luddites like me were still on irc. Jitsi Meet looks nice though again I haven’t explored it much. I’ve been puzzled for a long time that there is so much work in this area yet everything has deficiencies. Are there difficult problems to solve?

        3. If Signal’s code is open then of course I’d want to self-host the server. Can I do that? Does that get in the way of the onboarding process you mention? Where does the phone number come in, in that case? If I to use Signal’s server, that doesn’t sound so open, and normally there’s no way for me to verify that it’s running the same code that they claim.

        I don’t see where I’m spreading FUD. Ignoring a question and calling it FUD doesn’t invalidate the question.

        • rirus@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          You can’t easily selfhost Signal. They engineered it purposefully to only run on Big Tech Clouds with specific Intel CPUs they put (too much) trust in.

          • solrize@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Very interesting, thanks. Do you mean they use SGX (Intel’s buggy secure enclave feature)? Any idea what they use it for? If not SGX, do you know what the issue is? AMD Epyc processors have something similar but different, fwiw. If there is such highly secret info on the server though, that makes self-hosting even more important. It also makes the architecture suspect.

            • rirus@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Yes SGX, they use it for sealed Sender, contact discovery and mobilecoin.

        • rirus@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago
          1. You can easily migrate everyone from WhatsApp to Signal and they don’t have to exchange usernames as most people have the phonenumbers in their contacts. (This has massive drawbacks addressed somewhere else, one lesser known fact is that they would have to verify fingerprints anyway to be sure they are speaking to the right person an not a proxy. Instead of that they could also exchange username+fingerprint initially, like Simplex does it.)
        • rirus@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago
          1. Yes, kinda, if they have you in their contact books, they get a notification you joined.
          • solrize@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Thanks. The more I think about it, the more this seems like outright evil behaviour on Signal’s part to pursue user growth, similar to Facebook etc. Imagine that you and your boss are in each other’s contacts for obvious work-related reasons. Do you really want Signal notifying your boss that you registered for Signal? For some of us it’s fine, but in general it seems like a terrible idea.

    • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Signal is a messenger service. You can expire messages after a certain amount of time.

      They ask for a phone number to limit bots. I used my Google voice number and it worked fine. I like Telegram which banned me after a day of use for using Google Voice.

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I get that Signal is a messaging system (not sure if “messenger service” has a specific meaning). What I don’t understand is why I’d want to use it instead of any of the million others that are out there. I’ve never used Signal and don’t have the slightest clue about how it operates, but apparently it tries to mess with the contact list on your phone? That sounds bad. I use Nextcloud Chat sometimes and its web design is ugly, but it works ok and you can self-host it fairly easily. It doesn’t do anything with your phone contacts. Jami is distributed but (maybe unrelated) I often have trouble getting it to work at all.

        • ryannathans@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It doesn’t “mess with your contacts”. You can choose to give contacts access if you wish to have secure contact discovery. Contacts are not uploaded.

          It’s robustly encrypted and quantum secure, without metadata leaks like the sender of a message.

          It’s recommended by Edward Snowden.

          If you want to message someone, have the ability to verify there is no man in the middle attack, have perfect forward secrecy, very strong crypto, use open source software and still have all the conveniences of a modern message app, use signal.

          • rirus@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            CONTACTS ARE UPLOADED

            Robust encryption isn’t useful if you don’t verify the fingerprint and signal makes that not intuitively.

            SIGNAL CLIENT HAS UNFREE SOFTWARE INCLUDED

            • ryannathans@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Contacts are never uploaded

              Hashes of some numbers are if you enable contact discovery

              Verifying keys is easy, what are you talking about?

          • solrize@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Do you mean the client side is open source? What about the server? If you’re required to use Signal’s server, how do you know it’s not disclosing metadata? If you can self-host it, why the phone number?

            • ryannathans@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              The idea is you don’t need to trust the server

              Messages sent don’t contain a readable sender field

              Mobile numbers may not be necessary long term, architecture depends on accounts being created Witt phone numbers. Usernames were very recently introduced. Soon we may see requirement for phone number dropped, unless related to spam control