Signal’s New Usernames Help Keep the Cops Out of Your Messages \ stacker news ~privacy

pull down to refresh

Ephemeral usernames instead of phone numbers safeguard privacy — and makes the Signal messenger app even harder to subpoena.

view all related items

41 sats \ 0 replies \ @gd 4 Mar

I love Signal, I wish they were more Bitcoin friendly— but they enabled me to delete and uninstall WhatsApp which means they are in my good books.

36 sats \ 1 reply \ @03365d6a53 4 Mar

lies, they still require (and know) your phone number

36 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 5 Mar

Correct. It is still required to register with a phone number. You can however use a VoIP number and there are ways to acquire that without KYC. So, if you do it with this approach @Bitman's point is valid.

52 sats \ 2 replies \ @davidw 4 Mar

Great PR for Signal. Their service still needs phone numbers, and that’s the most important part of this.

Finally, while you’ll still need a phone number to create a Signal account, you’ll have the option to prevent anyone from finding you on Signal using your phone number.

So what’s the point? Why not just remove this silly requirement?

But because phone numbers make it simpler for most people to use Signal, and harder for spammers to make fake accounts, the phone number requirement is here to stay for the foreseeable future.

Oh it’s too hard, we dislike spam, so let’s not even attempt to solve the actual problem.

Seems to me they still haven’t addressed the root issue of their service. Great PR and somewhat better than mainstream alternatives, but still not seeing anything groundbreaking here. Still the signal of old.

52 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 5 Mar

Its all about tradeoffs to me. Spam is a real problem on every messaging service. Even those that require numbers. I get zero spam on Signal. I get quite a bit on Telegram and I got a TON on Skype back in the day. For the women in my life spam is even worse. I don't think it helps to belittle spam as an actual problem. Spam has really degraded the effectiveness of email for example.

I don't think we should be fan boys and girls for Signal, they have their faults but lets also recognize they have built a very good messaging app that is used by a great number of people around the world that don't have other good options(I know alternatives exist but none are as familiar as Signal). I have tried to move people on to Signal or other alternatives. Its not easy to do. I have had the most success with Signal by far.

They also have a target on their back. Lets not let perfect be the enemy of good. I'm very glad they have added this feature and I hope they will adopt bitcoin as an anti spam measure in the future. Seems like a good option but I don't think its a practical option for them yet. Not from their perspective at least.

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @CruncherDefi 5 Mar freebie

Think of the "phone number requirement" as "Proof of work". If you frame it that way it kinda makes sense. It takes time and effort (or cost) to obtain a phone number.

Obviously we at SN know what would make the better POW to fight off the spam, but the normie world is still not there.

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @duvel 4 Mar

When they don't require a phone number, then and only then it's big news, in my opinion.

110 sats \ 0 replies \ @guts 5 Mar

SimpleX > Signal

42 sats \ 2 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

Great article -- learned a lot. I didn't learn what Signal's business model is, though. How do they make money?

266 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bitman OP 4 Mar

Privacy is Priceless, but Signal is Expensive

Instead of monetizing surveillance, we’re supported by donations, including a generous initial loan from Brian Acton. Our goal is to move as close as possible to becoming fully supported by small donors, relying on a large number of modest contributions from people who care about Signal. We believe this is the safest form of funding in terms of sustainability: ensuring that we remain accountable to the people who use Signal, avoiding any single point of funding failure, and rejecting the widespread practice of monetizing surveillance.

https://www.signal.org/blog/signal-is-expensive/

Funding details via Wikipedia

The foundation was started with an initial $50 million loan from Acton, who had left WhatsApp's parent company, Facebook, in September 2017.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation had previously served as the Signal project's fiscal sponsor and continued to accept donations on behalf of the project while the foundation's non-profit status was pending.

By the end of 2018, the loan had increased to $105,000,400, which is due to be repaid on February 28, 2068. The loan is unsecured and at 0% interest.

https://wikiless.privacyredirect.com/wiki/Signal_Technology_Foundation?lang=en

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TNStacker 4 Mar

https://m.stacker.news/18820

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @doubleplusgood23 5 Mar

I have some (paranoid) friends that only use Signal but it's funny to me that every couple months they have new security keys due to presumably reinstalling the app. How am I supposed to trust your identity bro - I thought you were the paranoid one...

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @astro_penguin 4 Mar

I'm pretty excited about this, I had previously avoided them and used Session instead. But Signal seems a little easier for your average person to understand and use, so I may be able to get more people to try it.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @orange_crush 5 Mar

When signal adopts npubs and sats-based signup to limit spam, then we will be in the future we deserve.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @KLT 4 Mar

Ready for this feature to be available.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BlokchainB 4 Mar

Clearly not the NSA😂

Excerpt

Privacy is Priceless, but Signal is Expensive

Funding details via Wikipedia