• Ulrich
    link
    fedilink
    English
    118 days ago

    analysing network traffic wouldn’t allow an adversary to see what you’re sending with Signal

    How are they analyzing network traffic with Signal? It’s encrypted. And why does it matter if they know you’re sending a message? Literally everyone using Signal is sending a message.

          • Ulrich
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -418 days ago

            Or it’s just a perfectly normal thing that billions of people do every day?

            • MynameisAllen
              link
              fedilink
              English
              118 days ago

              Except that signal is blocked by many companies Mobile Device Management. The one that don’t can typically see who has the app installed. This provides a new clever way to maybe whistleblow

                  • @Broken@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    015 days ago

                    Not “you” necessarily, “one”.

                    I bring it up because you mentioned company MDM blocking signal. The fact that company MDM is active indicates its a company device (if it’s not that’s an entirely different conversation).

                    So why would one expect privacy on a device they don’t own?

          • Phoenixz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            117 days ago

            Then you’re a terrorist if you use the internet, period

            Nearly all internet traffic if encrypted, and for plain browser traffic it’s probably in the 95+%

            You access your bank? Terrorist! Email? Terrorist! Lemmy? Terrorist!

          • Ulrich
            link
            fedilink
            English
            017 days ago

            Then you’re also a terrorist if you use The Guardian 🤷‍♂️

            • @Diurnambule@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              17 days ago

              I dont’ know, do you have sources about this ? Or are you imagining thing and deciding it is true ?

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                017 days ago

                Sources for what, exactly? What is “fantasming”? The title of the article you posted is “Criminalization of encryption”. The Guardian is using encryption to send messages, so why would they be exempt? In fact, why would any internet use at all not be criminalized? It’s all encrypted.

                • @Diurnambule@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  17 days ago

                  So you read the title and you know everything. There is a liste of what they are accusing and their is no mention of internet

                  The elements of the investigation that have been communicated to us are staggering. Here are just some of the practices that are being misused as evidence of terrorist behavior6:

                  – the use of applications such as Signal, WhatsApp, Wire, Silence or ProtonMail to encrypt communications ;

                  – using Internet privacy tools such as VPN, Tor or Tails7 ;

                  – protecting ourselves against the exploitation of our personal data by GAFAM via services such as /e/OS, LineageOS, F-Droid ;

                  – encrypting digital media;

                  – organizing and participating in digital hygiene training sessions;

                  – simple possession of technical documentation.

                  But continue to invent reality. What are fact if not debatable point of view ? That the end for me. Have a great day.

    • @papertowels@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      How are they analyzing network traffic with Signal? It’s encrypted

      Not my specialty, but signals end to end encryption is akin to sealing a letter. Nobody but the sender and the recipient can open that letter.

      But you still gotta send it through the mail. That’s the network traffic analysis that can be used.

      Here’s an example of why that could be bad.

    • Natanael
      link
      fedilink
      English
      218 days ago

      Timing of messages. They can’t tell what you send, but can tell when

      • Ulrich
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -13
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        No they can’t.

        E: if someone wants to provide evidence to the contrary instead of just downvoting and moving on, please, go ahead.

            • I Cast Fist
              link
              fedilink
              English
              018 days ago

              Packet data has headers that can identify where it’s coming from and where it’s going to. The contents of the packet can be securely encrypted, but destination is not. So long as you know which IPs Signal’s servers use (which is public information), it’s trivial to know when a device is sending/receiving messages with Signal.

              This is also why something like Tor manages to circumvent packet sniffing, it’s impossible to know the actual destination because that’s part of the encrypted payload that a different node will decrypt and forward.

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                0
                edit-2
                17 days ago

                Packet data has headers that can identify where it’s coming from and where it’s going to

                Wouldn’t you have to have some sort of MITM to be able to inspect that traffic?

                This is also why something like Tor manages to circumvent packet sniffing

                TOR is what their already-existing tip tool uses.