[flagged]
I've reviewed Signal extensively on my blog. https://soatok.blog/2025/02/18/reviewing-the-cryptography-us...
I analyze cryptosystems based on what an attacker can do, given sufficient capabilities.
"The user adds the wrong person to a group chat" is not a cryptographic weakness, nor a particularly interesting one. Why would I have anything to say about it?
We aren't "silent" about your pet peeves. We just have lives and more interesting things to talk about.
> EDIT: tptacek enters the chat, my messages are downvoted. This is how he convinces people to use Signal.
This kind of comment gets people banned from Hacker News. Please stop that.
What? You mean a vulnerability that was mitigated in February of last year? In what sense am I obligated to comment on such a thing? You use the verb "omit" as if such an obligation exists. This is delusional rhetoric.
First you complain about tptacek choosing to comment about a tangent, and then you get upset that I didn't entertain your tangent. Pick a lane.
> just like tptacek tried to deflect in the other subthread after his Cryptocat objection was refuted.
I didn't see a refutation.
EDIT: The submission was flagged from the front page seconds after this reference.
You just did.
> if you use Simple Sabotage Field Manual tactics.
No idea what you're even talking about there.
> EDIT: The submission was flagged from the front page seconds after this reference.
Okay...?