this post was submitted on 11 May 2025
192 points (86.4% liked)

Privacy

37802 readers
764 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I remember a time when visiting a website that opens a javacript dialog box asking for your name so the message "hi " could be displayed was baulked at.

Why does signal want a phone number to register? Is there a better alternative?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 25 points 3 days ago (8 children)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] XenGi@feddit.org 32 points 3 days ago (8 children)

One of the design goals is that they don't have a user database, so governments etc can't knock down their door demanding anything. By using phone numbers your "contacts" are not on their servers but local on your phone.

[–] rirus@feddit.org 5 points 2 days ago

That's WRONG they have a Database of every Phone number registered to them and metadata like the last time they logged in. You send all your contacts numbers to signal so they can respond who is also using Signal.

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago (6 children)

But your phone number is, and thus every agency can get your full name and address and location.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)

I assume ease of use and spam prevention.

I think Signal tries to be at least somewhat attractive to the average person who wants more privacy than just using WhatsApp or whatever. Making it easy to message existing contacts helps a lot with adoption.

[–] skynet@feddit.cl 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

as I see it, Signal tried to fit that privacy gap for a standard centralised messenger, if you think about it, that might have made it easier to non-tech-savvy people to adopt it (even if it was as a request from a contact), decentralisation is not remotely appealing to them

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] moreeni@lemm.ee 18 points 3 days ago (3 children)

It's focused on ensuring there is no middleman between you and the other party, but it does not have a goal to provide anonymous messaging. Sadly.

[–] coconut@programming.dev 16 points 3 days ago (8 children)

no middleman

Signal is not P2P

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] rirus@feddit.org 4 points 2 days ago

THATS WRONG! Signal Server can just do a man in the middle as you try connecting to your contact for the first time. You need to verify the fingerprint manually which is not very obvious and present in the UI. In SimpleX.chat you automatically verify the fingerprint, as its the way to establish the chat to your contact and is included in the way you distribute the contact to you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] coconut@programming.dev 17 points 3 days ago (3 children)

If you want to be mainstream a) you can't have spammers, scammers, and all the other scum of the earth and b) finding your contacts in the app HAVE TO be plug and play. Literally no normie will bother adding with usernames or whatever.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] autonomoususer@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (7 children)

Signal is not perfect but we control its app, libre software. See SimpleX Chat.

Escaping WhatsApp and Discord, anti-libre software, is more important.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] SolarPunker@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because it's centralized, I prefer SimpleX.

[–] Undertaker@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

What an answers. Completely nonsense

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›