• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    53 months ago

    But putting a phone number in immediately exposes protesters to association. Sure, Signal can’t give out the contents of messages, but it still has the chain of contact. So if a government gets hold of this record, legally or otherwise, now you have everyone associated to a suspect phone number/person and can start rounding them up.

    It’s the complete antithesis of freedom of association when there’s a record of everyone that you’ve contacted. The contents don’t enter into that problem, and I can’t see why they feel the need to keep this as part of their system. It purposely makes it impossible to use this for something like peaceful protest. So, no, it doesn’t give you privacy from governments, because governments that don’t respect freedom of association will use that information to punish dissidents.

    I can’t imagine any reason to use phone numbers except to purposefully keep this chain of association for governments to use. Even Facebook doesn’t require this sort of personal proof, and it’s suspicious as hell.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Sure, Signal can’t give out the contents of messages, but it still has the chain of contact.

      it doesn’t. they’ve been ordered to hand over data multiple times, and the only thing tied to the phone number they have is 1. time the account has been created and 2. last time the account connected to the server: https://signal.org/bigbrother/

      • sunzu2
        link
        fedilink
        13 months ago

        FISA order could require them to collect the data and turn it over, US courts won’t be able to to do shit about it.

        This is purely I trust signal bro type argument

    • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      You’re mistaken on the basis of your beliefs here. Signal only had two pieces of data around your phone number (joined datestamp, last online datestamp). This means that governments can’t petition signal for any more information, since signal simply doesn’t have it to give (by design).

      Your point on fb is hilarious, because they do require it. They just don’t require you to input it, because (1) they already have it and (2) you freely provide the missing pieces without them even asking. But, like I said earlier, if this goes against your posture, use something like Briar or Matrix or whatever. Choice exists, because everyone is different and has different postures.

      • sunzu2
        link
        fedilink
        33 months ago

        FISA order could be in place and signal disclosed what they were told.

        This argument about them producing only two data points is good but it is not a slam dunk arguement everyone makes it to be.

        Signal has technical capabilities to time stamp every ineteration you have with another person if it goes through their server. This is internet 101.

        So we relying that they don’t do this but if US government said do it. They would and Jack shit anyone can do about it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          33 months ago

          That is my concern with any US based company. With all the information we have how their government agencies used both legal and illegal means to access data how can you ever think those companies can protect your privacy even if they sincerely want to?

        • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          Them being a us company is a very valid concern, and one I share. If I were a dissident, I likely wouldn’t use signal just because they’re us based.