• Imnebuddy@lemmy.ml
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        https://lemmy.ml/comment/15999861

        In the blog posts I read where the author, a security engineer, audited and/or reported vulnerabilities with two E2EE chat protocols commonly recommended as Signal alternatives--Matrix and XMPP--both had implemented half-baked solutions or refused to solve the issue at all in some regards, and both had evangelists that gave dismissive responses. The XMPP chud dev gave a laughably childish response, and the Matrix dev even admitted the team being aware of the olm vulnerability and deliberately refused to fix it for years. Not that Signal cultists are any better and not negating the legitimate security and trust issues with the Signal platform, but Signal is still a decent platform for most people's threat model, though it would be nice if there was an alternative that could compete with Signal to recommend to most people instead. If you care about metadata resistance and your threat model involves high stakes if your assets are compromised, the blog author suggests Tor-based solutions such as Cwtch and Ricochet Refresh.

      • markinov@lemmygrad.ml
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Depends on your threat model. Signal is fine if you just want to communicate with average joe. If you want something more anonymous look into secureX,

    • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
      ·
      23 hours ago

      What seems crazy to me is how many people they managed to convince that they were private when they most definitely are not.