“We’re aware of reports that access to Signal has been blocked in some countries,” Signal says. If you are affected by the blocks, the company recommends turning on its censorship circumvention feature. (NetBlocks reports that this feature lets Signal “remain usable” in Russia.)

      • @halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        239 months ago

        I’d say social media platforms are an entire different beast.

        Facebook is not the same as Facebook Messenger for instance.

    • Dessalines
      link
      fedilink
      79 months ago

      We should allow the US surveillance giants into all countries, and let US companies control all world social media and communications platforms. Signal too, since it’s a US-hosted centralized service that must follow its NSL laws /s

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
        link
        fedilink
        39 months ago

        I find these absolutist arguments particularly hilarious in face of UK now actively talking about restricting social media, and arresting people for posts. When people use media to incite violence and social unrest in countries the west considers to be adversaries, free speech stands above all other considerations. However, as soon as these things start happening in the west, then the restrictions on speech are immediately put into place.

  • Eager Eagle
    link
    fedilink
    English
    479 months ago

    Worth highlighting that Telegram in Russia and WhatsApp in Venezuela - both with vastly larger user bases than Signal - are not blocked…

    • OneMeaningManyNames
      link
      fedilink
      English
      69 months ago

      I don’t think anyone took those seriously as private messengers. On another note, I think Maduro cracked down on WhatsApp as well, and called Venezuelans to cancel Meta altogether. Or something.

    • @skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      69 months ago

      The session keys for WhatsApp are stored on Meta servers, so the encryption is meaningless. Meta can read everything everyone types. Yet all of the eastern hemisphere seem to worship it like it’s pure platinum.

  • tired_n_bored
    link
    fedilink
    149 months ago

    Client/Server apps will do that in hostile countries, that’s why people are moving to decentralized messaging platforms such as Matrix

    • @apprehensively_human@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      89 months ago

      Matrix has the unfortunate problem right now where all the big clients have matrix.org set as the default homeserver. Yes, it is a decentralized and federated protocol, but I wonder how many users are registered on matrix.org vs other servers.

    • @fira959@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You can just as easily identify servers of a decentralized platform and block them. The disadvantage of a central service would come into play if say the US were to intervene, though Signal has already said they would move abroad if that was the case. For network level blockage it makes no difference if the service is central or not

      • @Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        59 months ago

        It makes a difference in that you have to play perpetual whack-a-mole not only with VPN’s but with hosting servers.

        • @fira959@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          69 months ago

          That is true for both cases as well. One thign to add though is that signals own cencorship circumvention makes it even better at resisting this kind of blockage then an arbitrary decentralized protocol, though for an objective comparison it would take some research.

          • @Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            19 months ago

            I wasn’t just talking about blockage but also servers being taken down physically or via ISP. I don’t think I’m nearly as well versed in Signal as you are to go into depth of how it circumvents blockage via protocols but I assume they don’t decentralize their hosts.

            • @fira959@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              29 months ago

              Signal Servers are using AWS and are spread throught the world. The entire protocl is build to remove any need for trust in those servers, so they migth as well be places in the datacenter of the NSA. So in the end it will be the same result. With decentralized protocls like Matrix you may get lucky and not have your small server taken down because it only hosts a few users, but if we are using the number of users as a metric, Signal would fare better against server takedowns, since all users are replicated throght the world, while my matrix server is the only place where my user data is stored. Then again both can deal fairly well against takedown ins single countries.

        • @barryamelton@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          29 months ago

          And before lacked this and that. It keeps improving, contrast to Signal having the server code closed source for more than a year so the Signal devs could get a headstart and insider knowledge in their Signal-included crytpo coin grief.

          How one can trust Signal after them showcasing what they truly stand for is mind blowing.

          • @fira959@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Whats mind blowing is the BS people like you come up with to shit on a non profit open source project.

          • Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Signal having the server code closed source for more than a year so the Signal devs could get a headstart and insider knowledge

            That argument makes absolutely no sense. This server-side code does almost nothing. The only task it really has is passing around encrypted packets between clients. All of the encryption is client-side, of course including metadata encryption. That’s how end-to-end encryption works. The server code really doesn’t matter. The Signal protocol, which is used for client-side, local, on-device end-to-end encryption has always been fully open, and it can be used by any app/platform.

            How one can trust Signal after them showcasing what they truly stand for is mind blowing

            It’s very simple. The client is open source, and the encryption happens locally within the client application. You don’t need to trust anything or anyone except for the code and mathematics, which are fully open, so you can verify them yourself.

            It’s mind-boggling how people attempt to spread so much misinformation while having absolutely no understanding of the topic their talking about.

            • @barryamelton@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              09 months ago

              That argument makes absolutely no sense. These server-side code does almost nothing. The only task it really has is passing around encrypted packets between clients.

              So it knows about all metadata, plus registration with phone number, etc. got it.

              The Signal protocol, which is used for client-side, local, on-device end-to-end encryption has always been fully open, and it can be used by any app/platform.

              you conveniently leave out how you need to use the client built by Signal, with dependencies from Google Services and the like, and you can’t use one built from the source they provide. Which at that point means they can introduce whatever they want in whichever version.

              Decentralisation is the only safe way.

              • Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                So it knows about all metadata

                Metadata is encrypted on the client-side using Signal’s sealed sender implementation. The client also removes as much metadata as possible. All of this is open-source and happens in the client application.

                plus registration with phone number

                Signal doesn’t store phone numbers. It derives a user id from your phone number along with other parameters. It’s in the open-source server code, you can check it out yourself.

                you need to use the client built by Signal

                No you don’t. I myself use a fork of Signal called Molly.

                with dependencies from Google Services and the like

                Not true again. You don’t need to use the official binary that includes Google libraries. These aren’t required for the app to function. You can use Signal-FOSS or Molly-FOSS, and it works just fine.

                and you can’t use one built from the source they provide

                If this was true, forks like Signal-FOSS or Molly wouldn’t exist.

                Which at that point means they can introduce whatever they want in whichever version.

                Stupid conclusion, because all of your previous points are false

                Stop spreading false information, focus on the facts.

              • @fira959@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                09 months ago

                You can use reproducible builds to verify that the provided clients are the result of the source code and you can also use alternative clients like Molly

  • @x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    39 months ago

    I wonder why these 2 countries specifically.

    Some time ago it was reported that Russian Wagner groups have been spotted in Venezuela.

    Now these 2 countries have banned Signal.