Over the past days, two popular chat services have accused each other of having undisclosed government ties. According to Signal president Meredith Whittaker, Telegram is not only “notoriously insecure” but also “routinely cooperates with governments behind the scenes.” Telegram founder Pavel Durov, on the other hand, claims that “the US government spent $3M to build Signal’s encryption” and Signal’s current leaders are “activists used by the US state department for regime change abroad.”
It has had some suspicious funding sources
(UPD: It was funded by CIA)
(UPD2: Here I will quote www.securemessagingapps.com:
This matters because “money talks”, as the saying goes. If the company or person behind the money is likely to have reason not to protect customers’ privacy, it’s important to know. This could be indicative of the company not doing as they say (Google, Whatsapp, for example) or changing their mind once they’ve onboarded enough customers from whom they can make money.
(I’m gonna find sources for the last two statements a bit later to not be unsubstantiated)
Done.
Although, we all can agree, that Signal is still better than Telegram, or WhatsApp, or Threema, or whatever.
Still, we probably want to look at the better alternatives, like Simplex or Session.
Session is also sus because you effectively cannot host a node, last I have seen. They claim it is “against a Sybil attack” but all it does is making sure only people wih large disposable funds can have nodes, and the effect might be the exact opposite.
Simplex is more interesting in this regard because while I am concerned with initial centralization (the default servers), they made hosting your own easy. But I personally stick with imperfect yet trusty XMPP.
Don’t get me wrong. As far as we know, no malicious code have been funded. The very fact that the Signal was sponsored by the CIA is suspicious (maybe I used some incorrect words, sorry if so). Of course, it’s totally up to you whether you think that fact is sus or not.
Let’s be honest, Signal is not perfect either:
(UPD: It was funded by CIA)
(UPD2: Here I will quote www.securemessagingapps.com:
((UPD)Source: https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/04/06/it-looks-like-signal-isnt-as-open-source-as-you-thought-it-was-anymore/#update-2021-04-06-1-39pm-pdt-by-ryne-hager)
(I’m gonna find sources for the last two statements a bit later to not be unsubstantiated)Done.
Although, we all can agree, that Signal is still better than Telegram, or WhatsApp, or Threema, or whatever.
Still, we probably want to look at the better alternatives, like Simplex or Session.
Session is also sus because you effectively cannot host a node, last I have seen. They claim it is “against a Sybil attack” but all it does is making sure only people wih large disposable funds can have nodes, and the effect might be the exact opposite.
Simplex is more interesting in this regard because while I am concerned with initial centralization (the default servers), they made hosting your own easy. But I personally stick with imperfect yet trusty XMPP.
Which lines of its libre software source code are malicious?
It’s centralised
It’s not about code, but about funding.
Yes, and it’s the downside, no matter how you look at it.
So, which malicious lines of libre software source code have been funded? This is how we stop FUD. Don’t let them derail us.
Don’t get me wrong. As far as we know, no malicious code have been funded. The very fact that the Signal was sponsored by the CIA is suspicious (maybe I used some incorrect words, sorry if so). Of course, it’s totally up to you whether you think that fact is sus or not.
It’s not. Our devices run software, not funding.