ava @ava - 1y
i smell bullshit. this author clearly has an agenda to spread fud conspiracy theories, going all the way back to ww2 to try and link signal to the cia is a ridiculous stretch. #signal is not an asset of the us gov because the gov provided money to the otf (open technology fund). whisper systems received this funding along with several other non-profits. this article has a dangerous agenda of fearmongering and biased conjecture nostr:nevent1qqswgeqf7t67lwc48g7m9kd5m5v9exhl9zp67q5ccy9p3udav4t62kspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgq3qrenaud65zug8r570ndztde2xhk206z3v50a5mwa3kp2xshy3zmjqxpqqqqqqzj8axjp
*open
use simplex use signal use tor https://image.nostr.build/64c760307f90350f3cae2a2d49d4387ec8131406e7d87819364e32b66ae35202.jpg nostr:nevent1qqsrm4ky6n57gzu93xmf43mlywdftwjvwecgumeey8euafc08f8nz0spzemhxue69uhkzarvv9ejumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgq3qf6ugxyxkknket3kkdgu4k0fu74vmshawermkj8d06sz6jts9t4ksxpqqqqqqzs4yt8t
there is no comparisson between crypto ag and proton. proton's encryption is client side, and their crypto code is open source https://protonmail.com/blog/openpgpjs-3-release/ is 3rd party audited and can be independently verified. https://proton.me/blog/is-protonmail-trustworthy
don't quote half a quote to make a point. here's the rest "...are scanned for spam and viruses to pursue the legitimate interest of protecting the integrity of our Services and users. Such inbound messages are scanned for spam in MEMORY (i.e. it is not persistent), and then encrypted and written to disk. We do not possess the technical ability to scan the content of the messages after they have been encrypted." mullvad has gone ram only for similar purposes as data stored in ram is temporary and not persistent. using pgp or encrypted messages for private conversations is essential. if you don't anyone can read the contents of said messages. this is not a revelation, it's common sense and a problem proton solves as transparently as possible.
and you don't understand how tech works. have fun calling every privacy-focused service a gov owned honeypot. oh, and i guess you also think ed snowden is naive too huh? you know, since he uses and recommends both tor and signal and all. later 🤙🏻
nobody @nobody - 1y
Imagine calling one of the actually legitimate opsec experts on Nostr naïve. 🙄
Because random normies see this stuff and get turned off to tech that would actually benefit them. The only way to counter bad speech is more speech and all that jazz.
thx fren. unfortunately, i deal with people like this all the time. they give actual opsec/infosec professionals a bad name by spewing baseless fearmongering that really does nothing but scare people into apathy
I have very strong feelings about people giving security advice online, especially generalized advice. My faith in you was built by validating what you said through research and my own experience multiple times. So far, you’ve been batting 1000. I deeply appreciate that you take time to form context based on threat model of the individual, and explaining the tradeoffs between services honestly. One size fits all cybersecurity is worse than no cybersecurity imo. There are very few things (2FA over SMS is bad) that apply to everyone equally. Conspiracy theories are the worst though. That’s not even true information taken out of context - that’s just made up shit misleading people.
💯! well said. good on you for doing the research. and thank you for the complement
