this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
33 points (82.4% liked)

Privacy

37690 readers
620 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
33
TM Signal (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by root@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
 

The scariest part of this recent news is that TM Signal seem(ed) to be interoperable. People using TM Signal could interact with actual Signal users. How are you to know whether or not your groups have people using bastardized versions of Signal? Are things like Session interoperable with Signal?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

At the moment you can't. The only realistic way I could see that happening is if the servers would check the app's digital signature and refuse the app from communicating with the official infrastructure if it didn't match.

[–] EngineerGaming 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Which would be absolutely disgusting given that Signal's official app lacks some basic functionality!

[–] pinkfluffywolfie@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, I use the molly fork because there's features I like about it. I'd be sad if I couldn't use it anymore. :(

[–] EngineerGaming 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What are the ones you're after specifically?

[–] pinkfluffywolfie@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

I'm not totally sure signal has it, but I like the ram shredding and socks proxy. I know molly isn't fit for everyone's threat model but those two features I do like to see so I use it instead; I've not run into any issues with it.

[–] jesse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Even then, nothing stops the client from lying to the server.

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

That's the point of digitally signing the app, to ensure its authenticity and integrity. TM and others wouldn't be able to resign the modified app with the Signal Foundation signature.

EDIT: Yeah after thinking more about it it's not a trivial problem, as you need to assume that the endpoint is inherently untrusted.

[–] Corngood@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago (3 children)

It's actually possible in a way:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SafetyNet

But you necessarily need to limit the devices and operating systems that are allowed. No custom ROMs, no root access, etc.

It's bullshit and breaks open computing as a concept.

[–] EngineerGaming 1 points 16 hours ago

Not to mention that a device that would pass Play Integrity is precisely the device I wouldn't ever consider doing anything private on. Which would defeat the whole point of Signal. It's already bad enough that it's so desktop-unfriendly while much fewer phones than computers that can run non-privacy-invasive OSes than computers...

[–] utopiah@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Isn't that just delegating trust to a third party, e.g. here Google? It's not as if Google was somehow immune to 0 days.

[–] ouch@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Fuck Safetynet and Play Integrity.