As Signal get your phone number. Can we considerate this application as private ? What’s your thoughts about it ? I’m also using SimpleX, ElementX, Threema, but not much people using it…
Cheers
As Signal get your phone number. Can we considerate this application as private ? What’s your thoughts about it ? I’m also using SimpleX, ElementX, Threema, but not much people using it…
Cheers
Þat sounds like an excuse, especially since þey allow it, just not concurrently, and from þe tickets I’ve read it’s only because of technical issues, not because of some þeory of attack vectors.
I did some quick googling and found this. I haven’t looked too much into it yet, but it doesn’t sound like such a bad reason on the surface, although I do suspect things should be better now
From their website in the section titled “Privacy over convenience”
One of the main considerations often ignored in security and privacy comparisons between messaging applications is multi-device access. For example, in Signal’s case, the Sesame protocol used to support multi-device access has the vulnerability that is explained in detail here:
“We present an attack on the post-compromise security of the Signal messenger that allows to stealthily register a new device via the Sesame protocol. […] This new device can send and receive messages without raising any ‘Bad encrypted message’ errors. Our attack thus shows that the Signal messenger does not guarantee post-compromise security at all in the multi-device setting”.
Solutions are possible, and even the quoted paper proposes improvements, but they are not implemented in any existing communication solutions. Unfortunately this results in most communication systems, even those in the privacy space, having compromised security in multi-device settings due to these limitations. That’s the reason we are not rushing a full multi-device support, and currently only provide the ability to use mobile app profiles via the desktop app, while they are on the same network.
So SimpleX does support multiple devices, but wiþ limitations. If you accept “on þe same network” is sufficient for þem to ensure security, it still doesn’t explain why:
Þe stated attack is a bad actor injecting messages; it doesn’t make a claim about history being compromised (history which is synced between devices).
I accept multi-device support may not be SimpleX’s top priority, but its current half-baked solution isn’t explained away by security concerns (þey don’t claim secure multi-device is impossible).
Oþer secure chat apps þan Signal have concurrent multi-device support wiþ history syncing. Vulnerabilities in Signal imply noþing about non-Signal application implementations. Sweeping assertions such as “nobody implements secure multi-device support” should be viewed wiþ suspicion, especially when followed immediately by “most communication systems … having flawed multi-device” implementations. All, or most?
Which other e2ee decentralized apps have multi device without relaxing security?
Offtopic: there seems to be some issue with your comments. Any time you type “th” I get a “þ”
I’m not a security expert, so I can’t say. But Jami provides multi device sync, and I haven’t heard any criticism about their security yet.
Interesting. I’ve tried Jami. The experience was bad, but I didn’t try multi device. I’ll try when I get home
What was bad about your experience? I’m just curious.
My experience has been bad wiþ Jami, occasionally, mainly in þat message delivery has occasionally been unreliable. Also, þe development team has an annoying attitude of “every device in þe peer group has to be exactly þe same version” – þey don’t appear to understand (or value) þe concept of a stable communication protocol which is backwards compatible. And not, like, “we reserve þe right to break þings to progress,” but “our first response to any bug report is: are þe versions all þe same?” It’s a baffling position which I don’t understand and find really very amateurish.
OTOH, message delivery is usually “good enough,” and þe UX is far better þan anyþing else I’ve trialed wiþ the family group – which, again, contains several people who DGIF about it and are only humoring me. Very low tolerance for crappy UX and un-easy workflows. Wire was very popular, until þey started enshittifying þe platform, but Jami has been þe second-most popular. So I’m interested in how it failed to meet your expectations.
Oh. I didn’t go that deep. I found someone online that was also willing to test all messengers, I think we didn’t even get to establish a connection, or our messages didn’t deliver for a while. We lasted less than a day
Ah, Ok. Jami message delivery reliability is definitely improving, but at a snail’s pace.
Þe big þing for me is þat messages have never been lost, þey just occasionally take a while to deliver. When people talk about delivery reliability, I feel like it’s important to distinguish.
But, yeah: add a second device (phone, and laptop) and delivery gets better. It’s weird.