- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Yes, you can use Signal without sharing your personal phone number. Here’s how I did it.
Yes, you can use Signal without sharing your personal phone number. Here’s how I did it.
Privacy ≠ Anonymity
Signal = Privacy
Signal ≠ Anonymity
Signal was made for privacy, not Anonymity.
If you need anonymity, don’t use signal. It was never designed for this. There are tools specially made for anonymity. Look at simplex.
If I asked 10 people to give me their home address, they’re not going to care whether someone defines that as privacy or anonymity. But signal’s reliance on phone number’s (which are easily linked to your identity and home address in most countries) as the primary identifier means giving away just that.
Why do people feel the need to split hairs with these terms?
He’s not splitting hairs. It’s just a different value proposition. I don’t like the phone number requirement either but it makes sense to your average normie who realizes SMS is exposed plaintext. Something like an anonymous seed phrase as the key to your account would confuse most people. Email would be an improvement but it’s at best pseudonymous.
I think anonymity is heavily coupled with privacy, if someone knows my account is linked to my phone number, that’s a very strong form of fingerprinting. Even if E2E encryption is perfect, it takes one bad actor on the the reciever end of my message to both identify who I am through my phone number and leak my message. If just my message is leaked and there’s no fingerprint leading to me, I am still safe. Real example: It took Proton leaking the IP address of a climate activist to the state to get them arrested, not a hole in their E2E mail encryption. A phone number is potentially an even stronger identifier.