Skip to content

Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

Technology
143 93 0
  • Wish more of my contact list would switch over to Signal. It's nearly the same. I don't see why it's so hard for some people to just start using Signal instead of WhatsApp.

    Oh well.

    I tried switching my family over, but being unable to install it on a second device or tablet was a deal breaker.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I can't call ethical an app that relies on Electron.

  • The exit plan from WhatsApp is quite simple. Start by installing Signal and setting it up – it takes only a couple of minutes. Then, resume any WhatsApp conversations on Signal if that person is already a Signal user. If they are not, then switch to regular text messaging and gently suggest to that person to switch over to Signal.

    Sadly for me, this doesn't really work for some relatives as

    • They live abroad and the cost of sending text messages abroad is not insignificant
    • Some are so tech un-savvy that even installing a new app by themselves is too much.

    All I can do for those relatives is to leave WhatsApp installed but take away basically every permission I can, including running in the background.

    How did they get WhatsApp installed? Is a FaceTime or other video option available? Never give up, never surrender

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I wish I could do this, but trying to convince people to ditch an app they've never had problems with and where they all have their family, friends, work groups and school groups already mashed together, how do you convince them? Its not even about me convincing my friends or family, its about everyone else doing the same and when everyone has so many contacts in WhatsApp, that number starts to snowball real quick. Its just not feasible to try and explain this to someone who literally doesn't care. I mean even though I myself know what Meta is and how Zuck is complete asshole, I still can't switch off of WhatsApp because nobody I know is on Signal and I'd just be alone there. What's the point? WhatsApp is pretty much the first app anyone installs on their phone (regardless of platform), they're not gonna switch now.

  • I would rather SMS than use WhatsApp. But even then if my family is far away, why am texting them at all very often? With the time zone differences I'll call or email, or nothing. It's weird how people got along just fine with letters that took weeks and suddenly we now need instant communication for some reason?

    How is that weird? You can be fine with suboptimal stuff, and recognize it's suboptimal. Some people like their relatives and wished they could talk together more readily. Letters were just the fastest (while economical) method of doing that for a while.

  • Could you explain a bit? I see main issue with Signal (though I'm not an expert, and they're not strictly related to security): it's centralized (and the server isn't even open-source).

    The question is also a lot about your threat model right?

    The encryption being crap really does not depend on the threat model. Sure, in some threat models you may not need e2ee at all but in that case, what's wrong with WhatsApp?

    The issue with XMPP is that security really was an afterthought. Not only is e2ee an optional extension, but there are actually 2 incompatible extensions, each with multiple versions. Then you have some clients not implementing either, some clients implementing the older, less secure one. Some implement the newer one but older version of the spec with known issues. And of course, the few clients that implement it well become incompatible with other clients that don't if you enable e2ee, so it is disabled by default.

    That is all before you start looking into security audits or metadata harvesting.

  • I can't call ethical an app that relies on Electron.

    Weird goalpost but Ok

  • I wish I could do this, but trying to convince people to ditch an app they've never had problems with and where they all have their family, friends, work groups and school groups already mashed together, how do you convince them? Its not even about me convincing my friends or family, its about everyone else doing the same and when everyone has so many contacts in WhatsApp, that number starts to snowball real quick. Its just not feasible to try and explain this to someone who literally doesn't care. I mean even though I myself know what Meta is and how Zuck is complete asshole, I still can't switch off of WhatsApp because nobody I know is on Signal and I'd just be alone there. What's the point? WhatsApp is pretty much the first app anyone installs on their phone (regardless of platform), they're not gonna switch now.

    Yep. I know the details. I'm tech savvy enough, but I use what my contacts use, and I'm not leaving WhatsApp. Same goes for youtube. The content I consume is there. There is no suitable alternative until the content creators switch. It's not really about the technology at all.

  • I would rather SMS than use WhatsApp. But even then if my family is far away, why am texting them at all very often? With the time zone differences I'll call or email, or nothing. It's weird how people got along just fine with letters that took weeks and suddenly we now need instant communication for some reason?

    we used to be fine with candles and stinky lanterns filled with perfectly good kerosene too. who tf needs electricity? 🤨

    on the topic of family connection, I can't speak to your family experience. only my own. and our family group chat is pretty damn active.

  • I wish I could do this, but trying to convince people to ditch an app they've never had problems with and where they all have their family, friends, work groups and school groups already mashed together, how do you convince them? Its not even about me convincing my friends or family, its about everyone else doing the same and when everyone has so many contacts in WhatsApp, that number starts to snowball real quick. Its just not feasible to try and explain this to someone who literally doesn't care. I mean even though I myself know what Meta is and how Zuck is complete asshole, I still can't switch off of WhatsApp because nobody I know is on Signal and I'd just be alone there. What's the point? WhatsApp is pretty much the first app anyone installs on their phone (regardless of platform), they're not gonna switch now.

    Just ditch WhatsApp. Don't give in to social pressure to install malware on your phone

  • Wish more of my contact list would switch over to Signal. It's nearly the same. I don't see why it's so hard for some people to just start using Signal instead of WhatsApp.

    Oh well.

    "But why, everyone is on WhatsApp", and also a lot of businesses.
    "Privacy? I've got nothing to hide, what are they gonna do eith my info?"

  • https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram-is-not-really-an-encrypted-messaging-app/

    To get encryption one must start a "secret chat". It's an opt-in! Regular users will not even know the option exists, that's how well hidden it is.

    Regular chats? Plainly readable on the server.

    The main differences between a regular chat and a secret chat in Telegram, from a security standpoint, are:

    1. End-to-End Encryption
      • Regular Chat: Messages are encrypted client-server-server-client, meaning Telegram servers can technically access the content.
      • Secret Chat: Messages are end-to-end encrypted, so only you and the recipient can read them. Not even Telegram can decrypt them.

    2. Cloud Storage
      • Regular Chat: Messages are stored in the cloud. You can access them from any device logged into your Telegram account.
      • Secret Chat: Messages are device-specific and not stored in the cloud. They can only be read on the devices where the secret chat was initiated.

    3. Self-Destruct Timer
      • Regular Chat: No self-destruct functionality.
      • Secret Chat: You can set a self-destruct timer for messages after they’re read.

    4. Forwarding
      • Regular Chat: Messages can be freely forwarded.
      • Secret Chat: Messages cannot be forwarded.

    5. Screenshots
      • Regular Chat: Screenshots are not restricted or notified.
      • Secret Chat: Telegram tries to prevent or notify about screenshots (depends on the OS).

    Summary:

    Use secret chats if you need maximum privacy, as they’re more secure and don’t rely on Telegram’s servers to store message content. However, they’re less convenient because you lose cloud sync and multi-device support.

  • we used to be fine with candles and stinky lanterns filled with perfectly good kerosene too. who tf needs electricity? 🤨

    on the topic of family connection, I can't speak to your family experience. only my own. and our family group chat is pretty damn active.

    Did you get everyone to settle on the same thing, like Signal? We are spread out over about 8 countries, and with all the different phone numbers and plans, we use various methods, with several of us on Signal. Some on whatsapp, some on messenger. So we are not coordinated enough for a group chat. Which is fine, I dont really need to know everything all the time, we catch up when can, or get into small video chats occasionally. Luckily we do tend to physically see each other somewhat frequently.

  • Weird goalpost but Ok

    I think it is more of a hill than a goalpost.

  • That’s not even what it is lol.

    And as the other commenter alluded to, defaults matter. You’re not replacing the thing everyone is already using by pitching “here’s an alternative that is better in ways which don’t affect your usage at all, and also you have to dig into the settings to turn off the optional daily popups”

    They are monthly not daily popups. They are daily at the start kust to make sure you memorize your PIN, then they peter off.

    However if you ignore a monthly one then it doesn't disturb you until the next monthly reminder. What is the point of a PIN if it can be ignored?

  • There is threema, a Swiss messenger that gained some popularity earlier since they had end to end encryption before whatsapp.

    Unfortunately the source code is not open (even though they do get annual audits with public reports), and the client costs 3 EUR or something (once).

    Unfortunately the source code is not open

    Wrong.

  • Did you get everyone to settle on the same thing, like Signal? We are spread out over about 8 countries, and with all the different phone numbers and plans, we use various methods, with several of us on Signal. Some on whatsapp, some on messenger. So we are not coordinated enough for a group chat. Which is fine, I dont really need to know everything all the time, we catch up when can, or get into small video chats occasionally. Luckily we do tend to physically see each other somewhat frequently.

    no we are all on different platforms. half are on android and half are on apple which is irritating. so sadly the sms is our best tool to hit everyone at the same time with any urgency.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I don't believe in signal.

  • I wish I could do this, but trying to convince people to ditch an app they've never had problems with and where they all have their family, friends, work groups and school groups already mashed together, how do you convince them? Its not even about me convincing my friends or family, its about everyone else doing the same and when everyone has so many contacts in WhatsApp, that number starts to snowball real quick. Its just not feasible to try and explain this to someone who literally doesn't care. I mean even though I myself know what Meta is and how Zuck is complete asshole, I still can't switch off of WhatsApp because nobody I know is on Signal and I'd just be alone there. What's the point? WhatsApp is pretty much the first app anyone installs on their phone (regardless of platform), they're not gonna switch now.

    Well, just an anecdote:

    I simply deleted my WhatsApp and moved to signal. Just did it.

    People installed the app, at least the ones that cared about staying in touch. Which was most everyone I cared about staying in touch with. A few of my friend groups also moved the group chat to signal, though all of them do have other ones with the people who didn’t care enough to move too, but I hear it isn’t that big a deal, they had multiple groups before and will have in future, doesn’t really feel like any extra hassle they say.

    It’s been fine. No problems. I’ve had more trouble trying to explain to my extended family why I’m no longer posting on instagram. Those I never had in WhatsApp either back in the day, so they “stayed in touch” by watching my pictures I suppose. But I just consistently tell people they can reach me always via signal or plain old sms.

    I guess the biggest thing to be scared about would be fomo for most, but I don’t really care enough, I’ve got so much going on already that it’s more of a blessing that I don’t have to be involved in every conversation or meme sharing or whatever.

    It really gets so easy after simply switching. Just do it and that’s that. The people worth anything come with you, it’s just another app and another group chat or personal chat. Most already have discord and the meta messenger whatever its name is these days anyway. I know zero people with only one messenger/chat app and unsplintered groups across them. It’s not a big chore, and if it is, there’s always sms.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I will switch to signal when I can avoid installing stuff on bunch of my devices. Until web version is available, sorry it hard for me to switch and for me to convince other people to switch.

  • 253 Stimmen
    41 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    W
    Did you, by any chance, ever wonder, why people deal with hunger instead of just eating cake?
  • Resurrecting a dead torrent tracker and finding 3 million peers

    Technology technology
    57
    321 Stimmen
    57 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    G
    [image: b2c65740-fc22-437d-a27a-22129d68f194.jpeg]
  • 94 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 58 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    B
    Amazon is an absolute scumbag company, they don't pay taxes and they shit all over their workers, and fight unions tooth and nail. I have no idea how people can buy at Amazon, that stands for everything Trump and Musk stands for. Just fucking stop using Amazon if you value democracy. Pay an extra dollar and buy somewhere else.
  • 99 Stimmen
    48 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    Y
    enable the absolute worst of what humanity has to offer. can we call it a reality check? we think of humans as so great and important and unique for quite a while now while the world is spiraling downwards. maybe humans arent so great after all. like what is art? ppl vibe with slob music but birds cant vote. how does that make sense? if one can watch AI slob (and we all will with the constant improvements in ai) and like it, well maybe our taste of art is not any better than what a bird can do and like. i hope LLM will lead to a breakthrough in understanding what type of animal we really are.
  • 2 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    F
    IMO stuff like that is why a good trainer is important. IMO it's stronger evidence that proper user-centered design should be done and a usable and intuitive UX and set of APIs developed. But because the buyer of this heap of shit is some C-level, there is no incentive to actually make it usable for the unfortunate peons who are forced to interact with it. See also SFDC and every ERP solution in existence.
  • 553 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    swelter_spark@reddthat.comS
    Yeah, I don't prefer that. But with some things I feel like it's barely a downside, and I'd put Boxes into that category. It's useful and well-designed enough in terms of functionality that I'm willing to overlook the Gnominess.