signal requires a phone number to sign up. a phone number could be used to trace your signal account back to you. so why do people, especially privacy enthusiasts and experts (like edward snowden), still use it and endorse it when it lacks anonymity in that sense? i get that people could use a voip number or something to sign up, but still.

  • SatyrSack@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Privacy and anonymity have some overlap, but are ultimately two different things. Signal focuses on privacy.

    • ISOmorph@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t undestand this comment, could you please elaborate?

      The way I way I see it, privacy without anonymity only works if you can trust a service provider. Since there are no trustworthy providers, especially since legislation can cancel any assurances anyone could give you, anonymity becomes the only way to ensure privacy, making it virtually synonymous.

      • Privacy means that you can talk/act safely in your own closed-off space while no-one knows what you do. The opposite of private is public.
        Anonymity means that you can safely talk/act in public space while no-one knows who does it. The opposite of anonymous is … identified.

        If you want your talk be private while doing it in public or via an untrusted service, you can use obfuscation/encryption of the content/payload data of your talk (still anyone could receive it and know it’s from you and if they have the key they can decipher it).

        If you want to be anonymous in public space, you have to obfuscate the metadata of your talk (so that no-one knows who said it but anyone can still receive it).

        *And here is a bit of an overlap depending on where we want to draw the boundary of our privacy realm. In some cases, the knowledge about metadata like location and time of a message can be breach privacy while in other cases this is irrelevant.

        You could also do both, meaning you’d have an anonymous appearance in a public/untrusted space, having a conversation with only those people who have the key to your messages. That’s a stunt which is not easily accomplished, as obviously you’ll need a way to let others know how to reach you, and exchange keys (in other words, you’ll have to first make an appointment in private and in a trusted space).

        [wanted to write two sentences, no so much text :-D]

  • cosmic_skillet@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a well known issue for a lot of people and signal has been promising to fix this for years. Using a phone # for verification reduces spam and bot accounts, but like you said it drastically reduces anonymity.

    That said, anonymity != privacy. You could anonymously place a note on a car telling the owner to learn to park, but it’s not private since anyone walking by could read it. Likewise you can send an encrypted signal message to another user who knows who you are, so it’s private, but not anonymous.

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Signal is great for private communication with people you already know and trust. I was in a situation where I was organizing with new friends, and we had a big group chat on Signal. I cloned Signal to a work profile, and registered it with a cheap VOIP number, so that I could keep my real phone number separate from my political organizing activities.

      • ahal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s like saying there’s no point in having bathroom doors because everyone can see you going in.

          • settinmoon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Then you need both anonymity and privacy. Sometimes you do need both but they’re not the same concept.

            Privacy without anonymity is you using the bathroom with everyone seeing you walking in. They know you used the bathroom but have no idea what you did inside.

            Anonymity without privacy is like you pissing on the street with a ski mask on. Everyone saw what you did but no one knows who you are.

            Having both is walking into the bathroom with a ski mask on. No one knows who you are nor what you did inside.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Remember, privacy and anonymity are not the same thing. Signal is an app for private communications, not anonymous communications.

    You can have privacy without anonymity, and you can have anonymity without privacy, and either/both of those can be secure or insecure.

  • whale@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    My biggest pet peeve is that I don’t want to give out my phone number to a lot of people. And these days, social media handles have taken the place of phone numbers when making casual acquaintances, even when you talk to people in real life.

    That’s pretty much it. Signal’s privacy protections are unmatched.

    All the other reasons to move away from providing a phone number have downsides that are rather difficult to mitigate, IMO.

  • Hazel@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    With focus on anonymity matrix is better than signal, with focus on privacy signal is probably better, just because you are forced to use encryption.

  • Vincent@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’ve repeatedly stated that they’re working on removing the need to share your phone number with your contacts, but that’s taking some time, because they want to implement it in a way that does not involve storing your entire social graph on their servers.

    You’ll still have to sign up with your phone number, but the only thing that can be traced back is that your phone number is registered on Signal - and only by subpoenaing Signal, I believe.

    • Vincent@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Btw, the main thing to realise, is that Signal is trying to tread the delicate balance of being accessible and private. If you have the perfect private messenger but nobody uses it, that doesn’t help democracy one bit. So starting out with an easier-to-implement mechanism that also helps adoption (because people can get notified when people they already have in their contact list join), that still protects against indiscriminate mass surveillance, makes sense to me, even if it means your contacts can still know who you are.