4mo ago

Signal Is More Than Encrypted Messaging. Under Meredith Whittaker, It’s Out to Prove Surveillance Capitalism Wrong

www.wired.com Under Meredith Whittaker, Signal Is Out to Prove Surveillance Capitalism Wrong

On its 10th anniversary, Signal’s president wants to remind you that the world’s most secure communications platform is a nonprofit. It’s free. It doesn’t track you or serve you ads. It pays its engineers very well. And it’s a go-to app for hundreds of millions of people.

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/0QgXq

Technology @lemmy.world

Under Meredith Whittaker, Signal Is Out to Prove Surveillance Capitalism Wrong

www.wired.com /story/meredith-whittaker-signal/

610 169

You're viewing a single thread.

271 comments

This is the same Meredith Whittaker doing interviews with US defense-department aligned sites like LawFare.
Why are all these big tech sites like wired so interested in pushing signal anyway?
- I find it intriguing that the people will scrutinize messaging platforms such as Telegram, and explain in detail how one should not entrust their messages' encryption keys to these services. Yet, these same people seem unable to comprehend the concerns regarding Signal server having access to phone numbers of its users. The fact that these people are able to perceive potential vulnerabilities in one platform while remaining oblivious to similar concerns on another highlights that their arguments are more ideological than rational.
  
  For sure. I'm convinced signal is supported mainly for the same reason's apple products are: it's got a shiny user interface and it's simple to use. That let's them overlook all the privacy dangers behind the curtain.
  A gigantic US-based service based on phone-number(meaning real identity) identifiers.
  
  Exactly, it takes a lot of credulity to believe that the US government would just altruistically develop and fund a messaging platform that genuinely respects privacy. I recall somebody was talking about how collecting metadata is basically equivalent to having a private investigator follow you around, and I think that's a great analogy. People tend to fixate on the content of the conversations, but the reality is that knowing who talks to whom is just as valuable.
  
  Do you think they're lying to authorities when they get a search warrant? https://signal.org/bigbrother/santa-clara-county/ That would be quite a big deal, and someone will be going to jail if you're right.
  All they have is your phone number, the date the account was created, and the last time it connected to the service. Yes, that represents a vulnerability, but you;re just casting aspersions that the whole thing is compromised.
  Maybe there is some super secret NSA back door that Signal engineers aren't even aware of. But it's at least pretty clear that the local fascist authorities aren't getting that info even with a warrant.
  
  I think that the operations of US government are very opaque, and it's perfectly possible that Signal has to work with authorities like the NSA, while they don't have to cooperate with other authorities. However, even in case they currently don't cooperate that can't be used as a guarantee that this will continue to be the case going forward.
  The key point here is that if data is leaked it has to be assumed that it is used maliciously, privacy assessments cannot be trust based. And the motivations of the government funding and promoting Signal do matter in the calculus.
- Maybe the US government (or even "deep state" or something) has realized that making everyone use insecure devices for easier surveillance is as smart as forbidding fire exits so that people would be easier to arrest.
  I haven't heard too many bad things about Signal.
  Various dictatorships want to simply read correspondence because the social graphs producing actual value and keeping stability in our world, and also protecting their embezzled value stored abroad, are all abroad too, and they won't hurt these. Some politicians in the west want to invade privacy for the same reason - what they embezzle is stored in ways unaffected by insecure communications in their own countries.
  But if you are part of some establishment, even if not well-meaning, you are interested to protect the system from outright erosion, meaning secure communications.
  Other than that, WhatsApp and FB Messenger are owned by Zuck and he's become too big to tolerate, Telegram is an African brothel with no protection and plenty of diseases, and in general it's all corporate around.
  Let's please also remember that there are people of various views and interests in every organization and force.

271 comments