• PokerChips@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    15 days ago

    While this may be true, I don’t understand what this has to do with a tool that peaches privacy requiring a tool that violates all aspects of privacy.

    EDIT: ah I believe you are saying that I never should have expected such purism in the first place.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      I believe you are saying that I never should have expected such purism in the first place.

      What I’m saying is that Signal have a conflict of interest when it comes to Google and other customers.

    • Jolteon@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Hey, at least their clients are open source so you know that their chats are actually encrypted.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        15 days ago

        Well yes and no. You can compile a client yourself but you can’t use it with the official server, you have to use the binaries they put out for that. So there’s a bit of a gap there.

        • Jolteon@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          It doesn’t matter how many back doors they have on the server side. As long as the clients are open source (and end-to-end encrypted), the only thing they can tell is that two people communicated.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            That’s not how it works when you have a messaging platform where the server provider can secretly pair additional devices. Send PGP encrypted mails if you want it differently.