Their reliance on phone numbers for sign in, their release strategy, their attitude towards unofficial clients, their marketing of e2e encryption... all fits.
Their reliance on phone numbers for sign in, their release strategy, their attitude towards unofficial clients, their marketing of e2e encryption... all fits.
The only weakness clear to me is the US could force them to release a compromised client. But then auditors would probably notice within weeks, or even days, and their reputation would be ruined forever.
If so great! More is better
https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/so-can-pfs-be-enabled-in...
According to this, it by default implements it for batches of 100 messages or something. And for slow-paced messaging, it is quite a lot. No idea why, maybe doing it somehow else would make the already bad performance even worse.
Related discussion: "Why Not Signal?"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39445976
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29888228
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42788647
Also, Signal forces you to use Android or iOS while knowing that "Apple and Google confirm governments spy on users through push notifications ", https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38555810
Matrix is the actual solution.
The push notification payloads don't contain message/sender data. Signal also runs fine without Google services, which avoids any potential problem entirely.
They themselves contain the actual links and also relevant discussions. One more link: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/13842
> The push notification payloads don't contain message/sender data.
The other metadata may be important too.
> Signal also runs fine without Google services, which avoids any potential problem entirely.
Not everybody is able to avoid Google services on their phone. I can't run it on a desktop (or GNU/Linux phone) without a connection to an Android phone.
I have never understood the unflinching attitude towards Signal relying on phone numbers.