“Signal is being blocked in Venezuela and Russia. The app is a popular choice for encrypted messaging and people trying to avoid government censorship, and the blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries…”

    • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Isn’t the whole point of something like End-to-End Encryption so that not even the company themselves can read your messages?

      In that case it wouldn’t matter even if they did turn the info over.

      Edit: I read more into the page you linked. Looks like those NSLs can’t even be used to request the contents either way:

      Can the FBI obtain content—like e-mails or the content of phone calls—with an NSL?

      Not legally. While each type of NSL allows the FBI to obtain a different type of information, that information is limited to records—such as “subscriber information and toll billing records information” from telephone companies.

      • XTL@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The company, or any middleman, can read your messages if they have the keys. In many services, the keys come from the company. EEE is only as trustworthy as the clients and processes you use.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        You can read my article, or Drew Devaults on why he doesn’t trust signal, which get more into this, but the short version is that US security forces don’t have time to read the content of everyone’s message anyway, they care more about the metadata: message timestamps and social graphs.

        Signal stores all that data (via required phone numbers, meaning its linked to your real name and address), and via the US’s key disclosure laws, it would be illegal for them to tell you that the US government is hoovering up that data.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Mass censorship is never good for civil liberties. Let people decide on there own.

      Also Signal is cryptographically sound. Many other messagers use a similar protocol

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        As I commented below, US security forces aren’t that interested in message content anyway, since they don’t have time to parse through every message to construct meaning. Signal does require your phone number tho, as well as message timestamps, meaning they can build social graphs of real people. Tons of metadata living on a single US-based server.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          It doesn’t matter if it is US based. You shouldn’t trust the server.

          Signal has known issues. That doesn’t mean it is entirely bad though. Saying things like Signal is insecure is simply untrue. It has weaknesses but it also has the benefit of protecting your messages completely and being well established.

    • ivn@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      My question was more about the motives in this case.