Hello. I am looking for an alternative to Telegram and I prefer an application that uses decentralised servers. My question is: why is the xmpp+omemo protocol not recommended on websites when it is open source and decentralised? The privacyguides.org website does not list xmpp+omemo as a recommended messaging service. Nor does this website include it in its comparison of private messaging services.

https://www.privacyguides.org/en/assets/img/cover/real-time-communication.webp

Why do you think xmpp and its messaging clients such as Conversations, Movim, Gajim, etc. do not appear in these guides?

  • theherk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It isn’t. But I see this same post over and over. Really feels like there is a campaign against signal. Also tor developed by US Naval Research, so I guess it’s bad too.

    • A🔻atar of 🔻engeance@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      good to know leaking phone numbers and being the main Discord alternative used by congress and Jeff Bezos on a centralized server isn’t a problem on .world

      TOR nodes are mostly run by the US government and independent cryptocurrency entrepreneurs (Jeffrey Epstein email chain inhabitants)

      if you had half a brain you would use i2p

      • theherk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Cool strawmen; I didn’t say any of that. Signal protocol is awesome for privacy, not anonymity. Maybe I don’t have half a brain, but I happen to think the double ratchet implementation is an impressive piece of tech. Maybe I’m as dumb as your fever dream, but compromised exits doesn’t make tor any less of an achievement. Though i2p is also superb. I guess my brain is too weak to understand why those statements are mutually exclusive.

        • Arthur Besse@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Signal protocol is awesome for privacy, not anonymity

          The “privacy, not anonymity” dichotomy is some weird meme that I’ve seen spreading in privacy discourse in the last few years. Why would you not care about metadata privacy if you care about privacy?

          Signal is not awesome for metadata privacy, and metadata is the most valuable data for governments and corporations alike. Why do you think Facebook enabled e2ee after they bought WhatsApp? They bought it for the metadata, not the message content.

          Signal pretends to mitigate the problem it created by using phone numbers and centralizing everyone’s metadata on AWS, but if you think about it for just a moment (see linked comment) the cryptography they use for that doesn’t actually negate its users’ total reliance on the server being honest and following their stated policies.

          Signal is a treasure-trove of metadata of activists and other privacy-seeking people, and the fact that they invented and advertise their “sealed-sender” nonsense to pretend to blind themselves to it is an indicator that this data is actually being exploited: Signal doth protest too much, so to speak.

          • Daniel BP@fosstodon.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            @cypherpunks @theherk

            In most countries, sharing your phone number is equivalent of sharing you full home address. It would be great to see how people would react if instead of providing their number for an account registration, they were asked to give their home address.

          • ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I Facebook said they enabled E2EE, theres zero evidence and zero way to verify that. Facebook has been caught in lie after lie. They most likely lied about that too.

            • Arthur Besse@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Many people have reverse-engineered and analyzed whatsapp; it’s clear that they are actually doing e2ee. It is not certain that they don’t have ways to bypass it for targeted users, and there is currently a lawsuit alleging that they do, but afaik no evidence has been presented yet.

              • ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                I personally wouldn’t consider it E2EE if they can easily bypass it, which all logic would dictate they can. Your message isn’t going to be picked up by a 3rd party, but if a techno-fascist corporation in league with a rouge fascist state can read it, then its not secure at all.

                • Arthur Besse@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  In case it wasn’t clear, I’m certainly not advocating for using WhatsApp or any other proprietary, centralized, or Facebook-operated communication systems 😂

                  But I do think Facebook probably really actually isn’t exploiting the content of the vast majority of whatsapp traffic (even if they do turn out to be able to exploit it for any specific users at any time, which i wouldn’t be surprised by).

                  • ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    Like I said, Facebook is actively in cahoots with Trumps fascist agenda. I fully believe if you live in America at least they are using your chat history to build a profile on you for Palantir’s surveillance system. Like you said, there is no hard evidence for it, but based on their history, their lack of morals, their zero ethical standards, and the lack of legal repercussions for anything big tech does, you’d have to be a fool to trust any software they’ve developed.