this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2026
147 points (98.7% liked)

Privacy

5097 readers
195 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] scytale@piefed.zip 32 points 1 month ago

GitHub commit d7447b1 states that “accounts without phone numbers can never get phone numbers, and accounts with them can never lose them”.

So you’ll have to register a new account if you want to decouple your number.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago (2 children)

didn’t they announce this like five years ago

[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

At this point, if it’s on a phone app, it probably doesn’t matter. They have your number.

[–] mote@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago (5 children)

It's not entirely dystopian (just barely), we have newer messengers like SimpleX and DeltaChat (I/we use Delta) on the up and coming which deliver on all the same e2ee promises as Signal. It's just network effects as usual, getting people to try is the real hurdle.

What they share in common (mostly) is the architecture - they're built natively decentralized, utilizing caching relays with no single source of truth, or device of truth, to be used to create a profile of you like a phone number does. Encryption keys owned by the user and no single servers. Generally this is the Nostr design as well, so we have 3 different teams all focusing on the same natively decentralized architecture patterns.

[–] vanillama@programming.dev 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Is any of these apps good for phone calls or video calls, or just text messages?

[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

At this rate Canada would probably ban anything they can't get records from eventually if it got popular enough. I hate this timeline.

[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

And Canada is supposed to be “the good guys”.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

no good guys out there as state actors, some are the "lesser evil" and we all have to live somewhere

[–] vanillama@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago

They have great PR, but other than that no, unfortunately

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I started self-hosting xmpp recently, and the calls work perfectly! You don't need to self-host either, there are plenty of public servers.

[–] Zykino@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I tried XMPP but could not find a client that let me have a "video call" where I could share my screen without also needing a webcam. Or even have a video call where not everyone is forced to have a video flux. As far as I can tell an audio call cannot be turned into a video call for 1 streamer.

Like in Discord where one want to share its screen while playing. XNPP was my biggest hope to replace Discord with my friend but I either did not find the correct client or the ecosystem is not mature enough (or oriented in the direction I expected).

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, screensharing is not a thing in most clients, but I think it's a matter of time (years?) before it's properly implemented. In the meantime, you can use jitsi meet? Not sure if it covers your use case. I'll just copy this reddit comment, which has some good info:

Yes, it’s possible, but with some limitations. For video calls between a Linux and a Windows client using ejabberd, you need an XMPP client that supports WebRTC. Some options: • Dino (Linux) – Supports video calls but no screen sharing. • Gajim (Linux/Windows) – Can do video calls with plugins, but no screen sharing. • Jitsi (XMPP mode) – Supports WebRTC and screen sharing but requires a separate Jitsi server. Since most XMPP clients don’t natively support screen sharing, you have two main options: 1. Use Jitsi Meet, which integrates with XMPP and allows both video calls and screen sharing. 2. Use OBS VirtualCam (on Windows) to share the screen as a “camera” in a video call. If you want a fully functional setup with both video calls and screen sharing, setting up Jitsi Meet with ejabberd is the best approach.

[–] Zykino@programming.dev 1 points 4 weeks ago

An XMPP client embedding jitsi meet or having a plugin for it could be an option.

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

Arcane chat (a delta chat client) offers video/audio calls as well

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] basilisa@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

No, apps (at least on Android) require a specific permission to read your phone number. The phone capabilities of Signal go through their own VoIP service, not your phone.

[–] TobuscusLover2001@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 month ago

I mean, they also were developing usernames five years ago AFAIK. Adding usernames for everyone was the hard, but necessary step they finally managed to do. Only now is it possible to make accounts that are discoverable AND aren't tethered to phone numbers. I'm assuming with passkeys/TOTP(?)

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Bullllllllshit.

They've said that for years. It's easy to do. But they won't do it

[–] XLE@piefed.social 8 points 1 month ago (5 children)

How's it easy?

Not the technical part (which definitely looks as easy as just dropping a requirement), but the spam/abuse prevention part.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

just go the matrix route; username, password, 2fa, then any other connection requires you to verify with a current logged in session (or recovery code).

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 15 points 1 month ago

Cannot decrypt message

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

As someone who uses matrix and runs a matrix server, matrix fucking suuuucks jfc why are so many privacy tools soooooo bad at what they do on so many levels like wtf the proto the servers the clients the ux the metadata issues like so much wrong

Edit: and if anyone tells me to use XMPP I'll slap them

[–] modem_down@thebrainbin.org 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What are your main issues with Matrix?

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

I don't understand why an email registration is not an option? it was the default from when online services and apps appeared in the first place, and until about 5 years ago (depending on types of services/apps), and it's security and anonymity was purely based on you using your "main" address or a throwaway.

[–] scytale@piefed.zip 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The article says their main reason is spam/abuse, as requiring a phone number adds some sort of gate to lessen that. Emails are easier to create en-masse. I don’t agree with using phone numbers either, I’m just relaying their reasons.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] refalo@programming.dev 9 points 1 month ago

I would guess the sudden influx of massive amounts of traffic would force them to charge for the service, and they don't want to do that. Requiring a phone number, while invasive to some, does cut down on a tremendous amount of automated/bot/spam traffic.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I think only SimpleX has asynchronous messaging

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] someone@lemmy.today 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

this is bullshit designed to respond to increasing use of simplexchat and other platforms

and they still want to tie it to payment (so a credit card) so they can track people

and they are implementing it only after many years

a complex captcha that takes 10 minutes to solve would work just as well as payment, but they aren't doing it, and it certainly leaves me wondering if they are a honeypot. i can't prove it, but it's really suspicious it's taken so long to possibly roll out something that may require a credit card

[–] Eggman@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I have watched the futo video and i think don't think its very likely it will become a paid feature. The CTO said they would want to have the registration require some kind of cost but it was almost certainly meant as a computing cost not money. Link to the same video https://i.imgur.com/QMDjn7T.mp4

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Trump hates this plan

load more comments
view more: next ›