Love the way THE BBC is trying to make signal sound like some hackers playset, really shows how much the UK gov hate encryption or people having any privacy at all.
Less. If someone has root privs on your phone they can screenshot without your notice and send those shots wherever they want, encryption or self-deleting messaging apps be damned.
I mean, they provide the operating system and push updates to your phone via a trusted channel, so yeah you’re kinda extending them 100% trust already. I’m more thinking about malware authors here though; criminals or governments (or criminal governments) slipping shady shit onto your phone without your noticing.
Because it’s largely irrelevant? If someone says “This is the best lock you can use on your front door” and someone else replies “not if you leave the key in the lock” do you think that’s a important thing to mention? No lock is safe if you leave the key in the lock. Maybe it’s important to remind people that you shouldn’t leave your key in the lock, but that statement says nothing about the security of the lock.
Similarly maybe it’s important to remind people that their phones might already be rooted, but that statement says nothing about whether Signal is good or bad from a security point of view.
Well I use it and have put it on relatives phones so they can communicate with me easily, ideally though I’d use Threema but yeah signals a lot better than other free alternatives.
Signal, compared with other messaging apps, has added security features to protect the privacy of its users.
Conversations on the app are end-to-end encrypted, which means they can only be read by the recipients. Signal can’t even read what has been sent.
But security is only as good as the person using it.
Love the way THE BBC is trying to make signal sound like some hackers playset, really shows how much the UK gov hate encryption or people having any privacy at all.
The UK is an utter shithole when it comes to privacy, always has been. It doesn’t look to be getting better any time soon either.
It also goes to show that Signal may actually be worth its salt in regards to security.
You use Signal to avoid government surveillance.
I use Signal to avoid government accountability.
We are not the same.
Doesn’t matter if the phone is rooted.
Rooted phones with signal are more secure or less secure?
Less. If someone has root privs on your phone they can screenshot without your notice and send those shots wherever they want, encryption or self-deleting messaging apps be damned.
So if Google has root privileges (does it automatically on Android? ) then they can screenshot whatever they like?
I mean, they provide the operating system and push updates to your phone via a trusted channel, so yeah you’re kinda extending them 100% trust already. I’m more thinking about malware authors here though; criminals or governments (or criminal governments) slipping shady shit onto your phone without your noticing.
Important reminder. Why is this downvoted?
Because it’s largely irrelevant? If someone says “This is the best lock you can use on your front door” and someone else replies “not if you leave the key in the lock” do you think that’s a important thing to mention? No lock is safe if you leave the key in the lock. Maybe it’s important to remind people that you shouldn’t leave your key in the lock, but that statement says nothing about the security of the lock.
Similarly maybe it’s important to remind people that their phones might already be rooted, but that statement says nothing about whether Signal is good or bad from a security point of view.
Well I use it and have put it on relatives phones so they can communicate with me easily, ideally though I’d use Threema but yeah signals a lot better than other free alternatives.
Are they?
No.
Link
Damage control look up their original articles on trump.
Isn’t hard to look up the BBC site, their pretty much making signal sound like an insecure hacking tool only used by dissidents.
Why would dissidents want to use something insecure? 🤔