this post was submitted on 18 May 2026
118 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

84733 readers
3617 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 14 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Signal is great if you want some privacy chatting with friends and family.

More sensitive stuff dealing with state secrets? Probably not the best option.

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Im sure some homebrewed app is more secure lol

[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 9 points 2 hours ago

The main problem is control ig. On Signal, someone can ask for a code or passwords to log into your account or get your data. If you have your own solution, you can have physical security keys to verify yourself, making it impossible to give anything to anyone via the internet. You can also monitor logins and make logins on new, unauthorized devices impossible.

Encrypting stuff is not really the hard part of keeping oblivious users safe. As far as that goes, they will be fine if they have people who know what they are doing use established, well audited implementations.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 16 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

How secure it is remains to be seen, but using Signal or Whatsapp or similar apps for official government business is to be avoided, anyway.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 2 points 1 hour ago

Agreed, but maybe for different reasons. Could you use Signal for government communication? Probably, but it would take intentional preparation, setup, and training of the end-users (most of whom are likely not security-minded or tech-savvy).

But practically speaking, governments should reasonably be developing an option that uses their own servers as relays, not ones controlled by a third party. Signal is run by a nonprofit (i.e. not driven by moneyed interests) and has survived court subpoenas for user data (because of how the useful data is stored encrypted at the endpoints, not the relays), but they do not have the same interests in nor are they developing a platform to keep government secrets safe.

Also, it's a central point of failure; even if it remains entirely uncracked throughout its lifetime, if the company goes under, those server relays will go, too.

I feel pretty safe as an end-user nobody, but I would be thinking twice if I was a government official.

[–] meowmeow@quokk.au -1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Or any business. There’s always a back door if it’s not open source and self hosted.

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)
[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 points 13 minutes ago

Did you verify the code running on their servers is the same as the one in the repo though?

[–] meowmeow@quokk.au 0 points 2 hours ago

If you don’t compile and self host, it’s not safe.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 21 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

mSzyfr was touted by the government as "the first secure instant messenger fully under Polish jurisdiction."

It does, however, rely on multi-factor authentication (MFA) provided by US megacorps. Microsoft is the recommended option...

Why?

users [can] retain access to messages even after logging out of the platform

This sounds great. Nothing bad could happen here. I'm sure the people developing this are competent.

An FAQ document for mSzyfr states that the messenger is built with a privacy-by-design philosophy, and explicitly notes that neither WhatsApp nor Signal fits this description.

Extremely competent, saying Signal is not private by design.

[–] HailHydra@infosec.pub 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Extremely competent, saying Signal is not private by design.

While very disingenuous, it's not technically incorrect.

Signal is secure by design, and is extremely good at that with a very well designed and vetted cryptographic protocol.

But privacy isn't one of their primary goals, nor should it if it comes at the cost of security; for example, for the longest time you needed to share your phone number with everyone you wanted to talk to, and everyone in every group chat you are a part of could see it.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 2 hours ago

Really?! Based on their website, I'd say privacy is their primary goal, and personally I'd say they've done a great job at it

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 59 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

‘secure’ state-developed

Press X to doubt

[–] tourist@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

headlines in a few days:

security researchers discover 'radioactive' vulnerability in Polish government messaging app

[–] Naich@piefed.world 35 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Not as stupid as the headline makes it sound. Signal is used in phishing attacks, whereas the home grown one is restricted to authorised users, making it more difficult.

[–] actionjbone@sh.itjust.works 25 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Narrator: until someone else gains access

[–] Naich@piefed.world 15 points 6 hours ago

Yeah, I was careful to say "more difficult". This stops casual phishing.

[–] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 8 points 5 hours ago

Someone doesn't understand the first rule of How Not To Be Seen

Using an app that nobody else uses provides no entropy in which to get lost

https://youtube.com/watch?v=C-M2hs3sXGo

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 18 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

that's reskinned, siloed matrix instance with maybe minimal changes

[–] SrMono@feddit.org 11 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

German Army does the same. No shame there.

[–] belochka@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Any ideas why it's always Matrix? Not even XMPP.

With not very performant servers and not very rich choice of clients, and still work in progress. And notably more fit for group chats rather than anything private and secure.

It's just Matrix being popular?

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 1 points 18 minutes ago

xmpp sucks balls and wasn't encrypted from day one. they have migrated from threema

[–] SrMono@feddit.org 2 points 2 hours ago

Maybe. Or they got the feeling to use a low-effort open protocol, that isn’t xmpp. I mean, they considered open whisper, for example, they would have to invest in a custom client.

With matrix they slap a new sticker on the software and call it a day.

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 17 minutes ago)

I mean, yeah. But it's not some national open source project, and that was claimed. Also, i'd like to know how intensely it was audited, because it's something different from open-source matrix homeserver/element-x (it's the propertiary part of it)

polish army used it too before this one, but it wasn't intended for sensitive info

[–] M33@piefed.world 4 points 5 hours ago

France did that too with matrix fork « tchap »

[–] SrMono@feddit.org 26 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Changing the App doesn’t fix that morons are using it wrong and in an unsafe manner.

Maybe they should spent the money on mandatory IT security training.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 2 points 27 minutes ago (1 children)

I guarantee they already do that

[–] SrMono@feddit.org 1 points 22 minutes ago

And still the idiocracy prevails.

[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

kegsbreath has entered the chat

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 59 minutes ago

I'd be pretty pissed if governments' views on Signal come exclusively from US officials clearly misusing the software.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 hours ago