• gedaliyah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Wait, the centralized service that security experts warned for years could be easily compromised because a centralized messaging service is inherently insecure has now been compromised? Surprised Pikachu face

    • Star@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Not to discredit your arguement but isn’t Signal also centralised?

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The data is not centralized in the same way, making it slightly better, but yeah. A lot of the same pitfalls of centralization happen there. The whole system doesn’t operate without the corporate servers in the middle, even though they don’t see or store the data. They have total access to Metadata. The organization could be sold for profit, shut down, change terms, etc.

        If security is important, you’re better off with something decentralized like matrix. I’m not an expert, so hopefully, a lot of people here who are smarter than me will fact check these statements, but at least those are my impressions.

      • MiltownClowns@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It is, which is why the comment didn’t advocate for it. Signal has more robust encryption than telegram, but its not zero-trust. They should really be using private hosted services instead of public or pgp, but when battle kicks off you use whatever works and then go back and revise as needed when you’re not dodging bombs.

    • MehBlah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Owned by a fake rebel russian who has somehow managed to keep from falling out of a window on a high floor. Cough, cough plant.