• istanbullu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    49
    ·
    2 months ago

    Signal’s hostility to third party clients is a huge red flag.

    They also refuse to distance themselves from Google’s app store.

    • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s outdated information:

      Go forth and contribute, fork, or create your own.

      They also refuse to distance themselves from Google’s app store.

      This link has existed forever at this point if we count in internet years: https://signal.org/android/apk/ - getting an app directly from the developer with no middleman is about as distant as you can get from Google’s app store.

      • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Those clients exist despite Signal Foundation, not because they encourage community development. They are doing everything they can to discourage third party app development.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I wish they had Signal on F-droid but at the end of the day at least it is possible to use Molly Foss.

      • misaloun@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Signal actually has a rule on not using third party clients on its servers. These clients existing do not prove the point you intend.

    • Vitaly@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah, I would like to use it from f-droid instead of google store or apk

    • ramenu@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      2 months ago

      What? How is this a red flag? Having third party clients is not good for security.

      • doctortran@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Having third party clients is not good for security.

        If the first party provider told you this, you should always second guess them.

        Moreover, providing an option that informed users can choose doesn’t hurt security. This idea the user can’t be trusted to use the appropriate type of messaging if provided options needs to die.

      • PlexSheep@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Why do you think so? I see it as a strength in diversity and a great driving force for a proper server api

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do you hate Signal or do you hate the west? There legitimate reasons to not like Signal but calling them hostile toward third party clients is untrue. Last time I checked Signal wasn’t proprietary.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        They have demonstrated history of asking third party clients to not use the signal name, and not use the signal network. The client that currently exists that do this do it against the wishes of the signal foundation

        • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          They have demonstrated history of asking third party clients to not use the signal name, and not use the signal network.

          The lead developer, nearly 10 years ago now, specifically asked LibreSignal to stop. A single event does not make a demonstrated history.

          The client that currently exists that do this do it against the wishes of the signal foundation

          If you have evidence to back this claim, I would like to see it so I can stop spreading misinformation.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            In the Libra signal issue that you linked to, they made it clear they don’t want third-party clients talking to signal servers

            You’re free to use our source code for whatever you would like under the terms of the license, but you’re not entitled to use our name or the service that we run.

            If you think running servers is difficult and expensive (you’re right), ask yourself why you feel entitled for us to run them for your product.

            • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              He was specifically talking to that developer. The “You” and “You’re” in that quote was specifically targeted at the LibreSignal developer.

              I recall the gurk-rs developer specifically mentioned that his client reports to Signal’s servers as a non-official app. The Signal admins can see the client name and version - just like websites can tell what browser you’re using - and could easily block third party clients if they wanted to but they don’t.

              If Signal wanted to block third party clients, they would have blocked them already.

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                Moxie made it incredibly clear, he does not want third party is talking to the signal servers.

                Libra signal took him at his word and turn themselves off

                The other developers, like Molly, take a stronger road.

                Is signal currently banning third party clients? No. But they’ve made it clear they don’t like them. They didn’t actually ban Libra signal, they just asked them to stop. Could they ban the clients in the future? Yes

                • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I’ll reiterate my statement as you didn’t address it.

                  If Signal wanted to block third party clients, they would have blocked them already.

                  • jet@hackertalks.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    I respectfully disagree. They could be waiting until it becomes a big issue. Right now that would just cost them good PR, but if somebody was using the signal network and their client became very popular they absolutely have expressed the desire, intent, and as you indicated the capability to do so.

                • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  If you have a backdoored client, then you would naturally object to third party clients :)