this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2026
327 points (86.1% liked)

Privacy

48525 readers
121 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 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Even State Department-funded Human Rights Watch admits that authorities combine legal and illegal methods to obtain convictions: https://text.hrw.org/report/2018/01/09/dark-side/secret-origins-evidence-us-criminal-cases

Combining dragnet surveillance with device hacking is intended in the design of both tools. Hence, State Department-funded Signal dupes you into handing over your identity as part of the population-centric mapping. In custody, your phone will be hacked when it is taken away if it's important.

https://xcancel.com/hannahcrileyy/status/2034273723667161480#m

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kirk@startrek.website 89 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (12 children)

This is total alarmist misinformation. The "evidence of terrorism" was not "using Signal" or "carrying a first aid kit", it was taking part in an armed assault on an immigration facility where a dozen people set off fireworks and shot a police officer with an AR-15.

The prosecution used the presence of the first aid kit they carried during their armed assault, along with actual messages (not metadata) from a Signal chat to make the case that the attackers planned on using violence.

There are a lot of problems with this case, IMO the most dangerous part here is that adds legitimacy the (false) idea that "antifa" is an organization that exists. Something the Trump administration has been struggling to prove. This X post takes small details out of context.

  1. Don't trust anything ever posted to X. Especially something that discourages the use of private messaging apps.

  2. I highly recommend everyone report this this post to your admins and strongly recommend all instance admins ban/warn accounts like OP. If we want the fediverse to catch on it needs to be more factual, not knee jer.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 39 points 1 month ago (2 children)

it was taking part in an armed assault on an immigration facility where a dozen people set off fireworks and shot a police officer with an AR-15.

based

[–] better_world@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 month ago

John Brown approves

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 28 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The prosecution used the presence of the first aid kit they carried

Insane bullshit.

I have a kit with me every day of my life, and I've had to refill it many times due to using it on others.

It would be pure coincidence that I happen to be carrying a first aid kit on any given day, and if I'm going to a peaceful protest I'm bringing my trauma kit because the entire fucking world knows how cops treat protesters.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I agree that bringing a first aid kit to a peaceful protest is not evidence that someone is planning violence.

I disagree that bringing a first aid kit along with explosives and assault weapons to a planned confrontation is evidence someone was attending a peaceful protest.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 16 points 1 month ago (3 children)

You completely dodged the actual question. Is a first aid kit evidence of planned terrorism?

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I'm saying by focusing on the irrelevant first aid kit you are playing into the hands of those who seek to discourage the use of private messaging apps.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

They didn't dodge anything. They answered your question quite clearly. The answer is context matters.

A first aid kit alone is not proof of that. The commentor did not claim that nor did the prosecution of the case. When taken in context with the other evidence and the actual actions they were able to use it as supporting evidence.

Now in my opinion their actions were based, but obviously illegal. If I were on the jury I would have let them walk, but that's all beside the point.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If you were ever in such a situation, I'm sure your lawyer would present the fact that you always have a first aid kit with you to challenge it's relevance. People who know you could be brought in to testify as such.

On the other hand, if you don't generally carry a first aid kit but brought one to the protest alongside the other listed items, it does seem indicative of intent.

There was just a news story that Denmark was (among other activities) stocking up on blood supplies in Greenland. That's not an unusual thing for a military to do, but it's pretty obvious that they were preparing to fight US forces. That's obviously not a crime, but the logical connections to intent are similar.

[–] Xaphanos@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Thank you for this.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 41 points 1 month ago (3 children)

We're supposed to take privacy advice from someone posting on X?

[–] Hominine@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Surprised that they didn't link straight to Telegram.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 39 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A reminder that your phone number is metadata. And people who think metadata is "just" data or that cross-referencing is some kind of sci-fi nonsense, are fundamentally misunderstanding how modern surveillance works.

By requiring phone numbers, Signal, despite its good encryption, inherently builds a social graph. The server operators, or anyone who gets that data, can see a map of who is talking to whom. The content is secure, but the connections are not.

Being able to map out who talks to whom is incredibly valuable. A three-letter agency can take the map of connections and overlay it with all the other data they vacuum up from other sources, such as location data, purchase histories, social media activity. If you become a "person of interest" for any reason, they instantly have your entire social circle mapped out.

Worse, the act of seeking out encrypted communication is itself a red flag. It's a perfect filter: "Show me everyone paranoid enough to use crypto." You're basically raising your hand.

So, in a twisted way, Signal being a tool for private conversations, makes it a perfect machine for mapping associations and identifying targets. The fact that it operates using a centralized server located in the US should worry people far more than it seems to.

The kicker is that thanks to gag orders, companies are legally forbidden from telling you if the feds come knocking for this data. So even if Signal's intentions are pure, we'd never know how the data it collects is being used. The potential for abuse is baked right into the phone-number requirement.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In theory warrant canaries could have been used, but Marlinspike has an excuse for everything.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

yeah that makes the whole thing even more sketch, I love how he never replies to the EFF link too

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

More anti-signal propaganda? Who is claiming it can’t be associated to a user. The messages are private, not anonymous.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

It does use deniable encryption, but that stops working as a defense the second they take your phone and copy all logs from your device.

And large group chats relies on how well you can vet participants more than it relies on encryption itself, and if they're too large they may as well not be encrypted.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago

Privacy is proof of terrorism. The state, and it's corporate allies, need to have access to your innermost thoughts, the things about you even you don't know, for national security reasons. This is totally normal and not something to resist. Vote republican.

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 month ago (16 children)

I really don't get the big "use signal" push at this point in time because even if it's private and the encryption is solid, it's a fucking American company. It's so easy for letter agencies to get information on their users from them, don't you realize that they can't refuse to give out your number if they ask for it and that once they have that your identity and location are immediately and thoroughly compromised? If you are subject to US jurisdiction and could be seen in any way as opposing its government, I really don't think you should be using it.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

All giving out your number provides is that you have ever used Signal.

They're saying ever using a private chat service is terrorism. That's not really on Signal.

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

All your phone number provides is that you have ever used signal? Not what tower you're connected to and therefore approximate realtime location? Your full identity via your telco? Social graph and history of your calls and texts?

I'm not saying it's their fault or that they are volunteering any information, but that's how it is for any US-based corporation (doesn't matter if it's a nonprofit, any legal entity that can be subpoenaed)

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The government already has access to every phone number in existence. They can already track every phone to figure out who attended a protest or whatever. Filtering down to "all phone numbers who've ever connected to Signal" doesn't exactly narrow anything down. They don't have any metadata about who you were chatting with.

[–] SpookyBogMonster@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

The government already has access to every phone number in existence

They used to publish them in big books, even

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jabberwock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 month ago (7 children)

This is fundamentally not how Signal works, but you are generally correct in that a phone number has been shown to provide a lot of context for a person (or a device, at least). But Signal (the app) only uses a phone number for initial verification of an account. You have a lot of options to break that association with you - use a landline and get a call verification code, use a VoIP number (assuming you trust the provider), use a burner SIM, etc.

Once you have an account, you can choose to identify yourself on the network solely via username so the registration number is not presented to other users. The Signal protocol itself is well-audited and generally secure.

If your issue is with Signal the American company, use an open source fork like Molly with your own UnifiedPush instance. Then you're only trusting them with transport of your encrypted messages, which again have shown to be secure at least in public audits.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Manifish_Destiny@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Because its one of the only popular secure methods of communication thats app based.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] hamid@crazypeople.online 16 points 1 month ago

Non whites know they make up shit all the time to put people in prison, nothing new here for the shit hole country

[–] Lussy@hexbear.net 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

worn black to a protest

used Signal

carried a first aid kit

lol shrug-outta-hecks

The laws are made up and we’ve always been fucked. We always knew that

[–] sakuraba@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 month ago

every goth tech nurse is a terrorist

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 month ago (11 children)

What evidence do you have that Signal collects anything? Traffic logs from the app or something?

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Signal doesn't need to, you need to trust the whole chain. You'll need to trust AWS, you need to trust Intel SGX, etc

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

At that point you can rely on nothing but Tor or I2P

Nothing else hides metadata better than Signal, without involving large networks of independent nodes that participate in Sybil resistant routing. The only thing that gets close is threshold schemes where you still need multiple independent entities running servers.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] RosaLuxemburgsGhost@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

The Prairieland case was an important case for the capitalist state of US Imperialism. It was a litmus test, a threat, to all people who dare criticize and challenge its rule within the belly of the beast. Just like the Iran war, which is about control over the region, and beating back any neo-colonial governments who don’t fall in line with the wishes of US Imperialism….this is the US government waging similar class war at home.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They will come for all colors one by one until disliking the government is illegal.

[–] Ildsaye@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Everyone should just wear all blue or some other colour

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

The places tyrants can't see into is where the threats come from.

load more comments
view more: next ›