- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
"Signal is being blocked in Venezuela and Russia. The app is a popular choice for encrypted messaging and people trying to avoid government censorship, and the blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries..."
You must log in or register to comment.
blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries.
Or... you know... at least for Venezuela, the USA constantly fucking around with their elections and politics and local assets using Signal or something. Maybe, I dunno?
Yeah. Telegram, should be next, there's a huge risk with it too. And email! Social networks too, just in case. And postal mail, we can't forget that. We should crack down any form of uncensored communication.
All for the benefit of the people, of course. \s
I mean signal was funded in part by the US intelligence community up until last year.
The current president of Signal is also still happy to do interviews with US-defense-oriented think tanks like Lawfare.
They probably still are funded by USIntel, considering how interested RFA was in pushing Signal in privacy-oriented spaces.
Unrelated to what the previous person is saying (banned because it was used by dissidents), but still, we have the source code. If you're arguing they are somehow accessing the data, what's encrypted and what isn't is known.
Signal knows who you are taking to. You can build a network of contacts based on that information. When you send messages your phone number is protected but your ip address is not, and the receivers phone number is not protected. So you can find two people chatting based on that information. The app automatically sends a delivery receipt when a message is received to the other user, exposing the senders phone number and IP address.
However, opposition in the country is backed by western agencies and NGOs, and likely their primary means of communication is signal since it's backed by western intelligence, meaning, western actors believe it to be safe from external interference.
I'm not arguing that the west is reading messages. I'm arguing that they believe it's a safe haven for their agents because they pay money to ensure it's safe for their agents. If it wasn't, they wouldn't use it. Its the same reason why the intelligence community in the west is a large supporter of the tor network. They use it in the field and operate their own exit nodes to protect their operations.
That's what you fail to understand. It's open source, it has been audited. Venezuela and any other country can check and crack the encryption if has holes in it. The long first paragraph is something that's not a secret, but widely known.
You know what's also safe? Encrypted emails. VPNs. Matrix.
If you think this is a movement against foreign agents, you should think it's useless too. For a sufficiently motivated agent, this will be trivial to overcome. For the general population? Not so much.
Unless next all forms of private communication re forbidden, of curse. Surely what people on a privacy community advocate for.
well, except for all the times Signal just "forgets" to update the published source code of a year or so. Other than that its perfectly open source
Funded by the US? Well thats the entire internet, including Tor, Linux and Matrix…
Amazing how much BS is spread here
The only relevant part is the client, which as always been open source.
The server is arguably more important, that is where the data and meta data itself are stored. Linux has never hid its source code for a year, and matrix can be self hosted.
I mean if you want to trust a honey pot go right ahead
Which ones? Signal? Likely. Secure mail and VPN? For sure. Can "foreign agents" use them? Certainly.
Who will have a hard time to use them? General population. Signal is the privacy communication service with the lowest barrier to entry, in terms of cost and setup complexity. Not a tool for spies, but for average Joe.
What service do you recommend BTW? That ensures government cannot snoop and prevents "foreign agents". It seems that any privacy is a risk, so I'm curious what a privacy minded person thinks should be OK.
"Likely"? "For sure"? So you have no idea of the opposition is using them, got it.
Yeah, I don't know. Do you? It's a fair assumption they use email, right? And VPN is standard in most organizations. I never even mentioned the opposition. Dissidents can be non affiliated people, who is discontent with their government or feel oppressed.
Why is it relevant? I thought you were interested about foreign agents? Or is all the opposition foreign agents?
Please tell me, should it be possible to have privacy from the government in Venezuela? If so, how? If you only answer one thing, please do this one.
Lol do you know how to migrate a community off one platform to another? Its about disrupting comms, not stopping them. Regular people will find other ways to communicate, as they always have. They have lots of options, as you've pointed out. I have no failings in understanding here. I told you already, signal is secure. Its security is backed by it's western intelligence financing. It has flaws in leaking meta data, just like matrix, proton mail, and any other means of encrypted communication tools. This move is to disrupt organized communication to make it disorganized.
No one needs to mention foreign agents. If you are able to observe and analyze the greater context for a given action you can arrive at an approximate rationale for the action. The west has a history of attempting to destabilize Venezuela, they back right wing dictators as successors, they regularly fund dissident groups who want nothing more then to violently take power in Venezuela.
Its clear that Venezuela is facing external pressure to dismantle their democracy, and are taking actions to disrupt those efforts.
Lol do you know how to migrate a community off one platform to another?
"Foreign agents" could install a VPN, probably already have to send data. 0 impact whatsoever for those "agents". Even for casual privacy enthusiasts judge be easy, depending on what's already blocked. Average people on the other hand...
Regular people will find other ways to communicate, as they always have. They have lots of options, as you've pointed out.
Also pointed out how those present more challenges. Why you think WhatsApp and face time are popular, anybody can use them. I'm still wondering what alternative you propose. It seems there's nothing that suits privacy and making Maduro happy.
signal is secure. Its security is backed by it's western intelligence financing.
It's security is backed by the fact it can be audited. Of course governments want PQC encryption. You think other countries don't want or invest on it? The only difference here is that is pubic, free and can be checked for backdoors.
Its clear that Venezuela is facing external pressure to dismantle their democracy, and are taking actions to disrupt those efforts.
When preserving "democracy" is the excuse to not be Democratic, something is wrong.
I'm still waiting to know what do you think is a good alternative. You already complained that signal is secure against all parties, and I'm wondering of there's even a truly private messaging platform that is open and approved by Venezuela, Russia, China... Please enlighten me. There has to be at least one... Right?
When preserving "democracy" is the excuse to not be Democratic, something is wrong.
Ah there it is. Its only Democracy if it comes from the democracy region of the west. Got it. Venezuela has one of the most robust voting systems in the world. Requires voter finger prints, signatures, national ID cards, and has paper ballot verifications. Meanwhile elections in America can be decided by some elite cobal system established in the 18th century by rich property owners for the explicit intention of disregarding the will of its people to favor the property class.
I see you have issues with focus, so I'll just ask again. What messaging system is private and has the approval of Venezuela, Russia, China...? Or is privacy against the state bad?
You are the one who lacks focus. This chain stared from this comment:
blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries.
Or... you know... at least for Venezuela, the USA constantly fucking around with their elections and politics and local assets using Signal or something. Maybe, I dunno?
Do nation states have the right to defend themselves from foreign interference in their elections? What actions should a nation state take to ensure the security of its elections? What actions should a nation state take to combat misinformation spreading about their elections?
Based on your previous comments it sounds like you believe a nation should do nothing.
Again, do Venezuelans deserve to be able to communicate privately?
Every state has the right to defend themselves, I'm a big supporter of Ukraine. But this is not that. You asked me of I know what apps the opposition use. Do you have proof that there are foreign agents and they use signal?
From a technical standpoint, this is useless. Only harms the population. If you believe this is wrong, please explain why this can't be bypassed with a VPN or proxy. I'm even forfeiting the proof that it's actively being used for "enemies of the state". And to west l what extend should Venezuela go? Lockdown from outside? Banning all encryption?
I have replied to all or nearly all your questions. If you don't intend to answer mine, then it's a waste of time.
I'm a big supporter of Ukraine. But this is not that.
I see your colors. Ukraine, historically, undemocratic due to western interference. Made the Communist Party illegal and disbanded it. Very good democracy there.
They are very much the same, except Venezuela is better at defending itself from said western interference.
Again, no answers. Why do I try to speak with a Tankie? Just another "useful" idiot that never left his US state.
At least your messages are here to show what you really think about privacy.
Lol Aw, are the geopolitics to complicated for you? At least your comments are here to show how you really feel about democracy.
In UK don't ban them, but jail you if they don't like your posts, more democratic.
I'm not aware of the kingdom of whataboutistan. Is it related to this post somehow?
Keep going, then. Any other country to mention, seeing how it's important to you? Russia? China? Italy? India? Pakistan?
I somehow feel your "broad" is actually quite narrow. Usually happens with the whatabautisms
Why going so long when we have a near, english-speaking , clean example of a country famous for the free speech. If you have the highest example of human rights why check the rest.
So much from broadening... As soon as I mention any other suddenly there's no point checking other countries.
Self defense is self defense, would we expect some different behavior from a country being attacked from outside interests with publicly accessible end to end encryption services?
Publicly accessible: reviewed and audited by hundreds of teams that confirmed there's no backdoor. Venezuelan, Russian and Chinese governments didn't find the holes, even having access to the code. If they did, they would be exploiting it to.... reeducate.
Yeah, I would expect to trust that. Still, you said yourself, the problem is that is used by dissidents. And we can't have that, right?
Open source, except when they do not publish it. Funded incredibly heavily buy the United States Intelegency Agencies. That would be more than enough to raise red flags for any nation that is not on the best terms with the United States.
Signal in all likelyhood is a honey pot
Funded by the US? Well thats the entire internet, including Tor, Linux and Matrix...
Amazing how much BS is spread here
The server is arguably more important, that is where the data and meta data itself are stored. Linux has never hid its source code for a year, and matrix can be self hosted.
I mean if you want to trust a honey pot go right ahead
Your claim about it being a honey pot is entirely baseless. There is a significantly better chance you are working for the US to prevent people from using signal...
Yes because the US does not want you useing a central server in its jurisdiction so it can force the organistation to give out all the meta data while not being alowed to alert anyone. How dare you use something that could give the US so much information in one easy package
You clearly have no clue how the internet or signal works. There is no information on signal servers that arent already available through the telcos, litterally zero
Did I say the prefrence was to use normal telecomunication providers? or that the internet in general where super secure, no, but Signal is not secure either, and it in all likelyhood a honey pot
There is no reason to assume that based on the fact that they do not posess any information on their servers that would not be available to authorities anyway. You are making up nonesense based on your own delusions.
Smart move, considering Signal is a US-hosted centralized service that has to comply with US NSL laws.
These comments below seem to be unaware of all the issues privacy advocates have of signal.
they hated him because he spoke the truth smh
use matrix, briar, simplex in that order
also what email platforms + vpns do you recommend, out of curiosity?
I don't get it, are you really arguing that Russia and Venezuela are blocking Signal to protect their citizens from American snooping?
All countries should ban US-domiciled companies like signal, or any communication platform hosted in Five-eyes countries, and especially ones domiciled in the US, which has to adhere to National Security Letters.
https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security-letters/faq
Well IMO all countries should have the motivation to prevent US spying on their country's populations. You generally don't know about honey pots before they get exposed.
The question of what should be done can be interesting, but that was not my question. It's obvious this is not the motive here.
If you are in your own country opposition it's better to use a foreign tool, even better if it's in a country that's not gonna collaborate with yours.
I imagine just using metadata you can look for people who are discontent, then provides list of those people to the opposition to contact and mobilize them and get them to protest.
Or target them with stories and bots to turn them into a revolutionary force, but that would be more useful for social media networks instead of signal.
I wrote this, but I'd also like to add Drew Devault - Why I don't trust signal. There's a huge disconnect between what privacy advocates are saying about signal, and what reddit "privacy" communities think about it. If you read the article I linked, you'll see its because the Open Technology Fund (a US state-run entity), actively pushes signal in privacy spaces.
Peer to peer apps do not work without a centralized relay to get you around the CG-Nat that cellphones live behind. So they're not really peer to peer. You would be playing whack-a-mole with the relays, having to spin them up as they get blocked. Many ISPs implement CG-NAT as well. Its really dependent on how the network providers structure things. Someone from the country with local knowledge would have to test it.
IPv6 doesn't need CGNAT. So as long as it's capable of doing IPv6, it can directly communicate peer to peer using globally unique addresses. How do I know this? Simple because my ISP on IPv4 is completely CGNAT and I cannot get anything past it. So I am completely forced to use IPv6 for any service I want to run and access from outside my network.
Sure, but ipv6 is not widely adopted. I'm behind a CG-NAT but can't get an ipv6 so I have to operate a vps bridge to host my services. Some cell networks have ipv6 support but a few implement a NAT for it as well. AT&T only allows port 80 and 443.
Its not consistent enough to be useful without a centralized relay.
I think that really depends on where you are. Here in the US, for example, IPv6 is pretty darn well adopted. And even 45% of Google's internet traffic is done over IPv6.
Sure but if your looking to use a chat service, 45% is not a high enough watermark to have reliability. Its so contingent on the network operator to allow for an IPV6 connection. And like I said, places like AT&T have a NAT on their IPV6 network.
True, the only other option is something like simplex through tor. There are also p2p options like meshtastic as well.
Non ipv6 parts of the internet are considered derelict at at this point.
And... That doesn't change the fact it's not widely adopted enough for peer2peer chat services without the need of a relay.
IPv6 doesn't need CGnet. So as long as it's capable of doing IPv6, it can directly communicate peer to peer using globally unique addresses. How do I know this? Simple because my ISP on IPv4 is completely CG NAT and I cannot get anything past it. So I am completely forced to use IPv6 for any service I want to run and access from outside my network.
Telegram is not secure, I guess if you can listen to it better not block it.
Are you mad at verge for not expounding on what that button does, or trying to display the issue itself?
https://signal.org/blog/proxy-please/ in case
Why countries that do not prosecute political dissent bock apps used by political dissenters? /s
