@AprilF00lz@lemmy.ml to Privacy@lemmy.mlEnglish • 7 months agoDownsides of Signal alternatives compared to Signal?message-square87fedilinkarrow-up193arrow-down15file-text
arrow-up188arrow-down1message-squareDownsides of Signal alternatives compared to Signal?@AprilF00lz@lemmy.ml to Privacy@lemmy.mlEnglish • 7 months agomessage-square87fedilinkfile-text
I’m thinking of the things listed on the Privacy Guides real-time communication section https://www.privacyguides.org/en/real-time-communication/
minus-squarePossibly linuxlinkfedilinkEnglish2•7 months agoSignal is still secure. If it wasn’t it wouldn’t be used in Military applications.
minus-square@jet@hackertalks.comlinkfedilinkEnglish5•7 months agoSecure within the context of a certain threat model. The French government does not endorse signal for government communication as an example And I would highly suspect the Russian government would not use signal either. I cite both of these as examples of threat models that can’t ignore some of the potential capability of the signal.
minus-squarePossibly linuxlinkfedilinkEnglish3•7 months agoIn the US government organizations are trying to protect themselves from each other and themselves. (Its messy) Not to say that Signal is perfect (its not) but if the DoD recommends it and has guidance on how to harden it then it can’t be to bad.
Signal is still secure. If it wasn’t it wouldn’t be used in Military applications.
Secure within the context of a certain threat model.
The French government does not endorse signal for government communication as an example
And I would highly suspect the Russian government would not use signal either.
I cite both of these as examples of threat models that can’t ignore some of the potential capability of the signal.
In the US government organizations are trying to protect themselves from each other and themselves. (Its messy)
Not to say that Signal is perfect (its not) but if the DoD recommends it and has guidance on how to harden it then it can’t be to bad.