this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2025
419 points (84.6% liked)
Privacy
4040 readers
217 users here now
Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.
Rules
PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!
- Be civil and no prejudice
- Don't promote big-tech software
- No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
- No reposting of news that was already posted
- No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
- No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)
Related communities:
Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.
- !opensource@programming.dev
- !selfhosting@slrpnk.net / !selfhosted@lemmy.world
- !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !drm@lemmy.dbzer0.com
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You seem to be misinformed. Signals architecture is explicitly designed in a way to minimise metadata as much as possible. You can look up the data they had to hand over due to lawsuits, it was absolutely minimal
First - I'm not sure Sealed Sender would help against the server being changed to be actively malicious and trying to build social graphs. Second - even metadata concerns aside, a centralized system is just not resilient. Proposals like Chat Control are A LOT more easily enforceable with them than with tiny selfhosted servers.
I know that Signal runs on US cloud infrastructure (like AWS IRRC)
Doesn't change a thing about it's security or what they hand to disclose to authorities
And only that one.
Signal dev is quite adamant on not letting people have their own servers, select a EU provider (yeah, EU is nazifying, but at least it's a large enough second-hand basket) or host the (suppossedly zero-knowledge) messages on one's own infrastructure. I'd say that's curious.