• Zachariah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Signal being an American company is also problematic.

    These two are the best balance of security/convenience, however.

    • breadcat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      server location and legal jurisdiction shouldn’t matter for any truly secure messenger

        • breadcat
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          if a messenger is truly 0 trust end to end encryption, it doesn’t matter who owns the servers or the legal protections of data because they won’t have any data anyway. that’s why signal is so good, when they get subpoenaed the only information that they actually have is the last connection and message sent unix times or something. still secure regardless of being in the US and being run on centralized Amazon, google, and cloudflare servers.

          • Zachariah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            Then the jurisdiction of software development matters. Don’t want a back door being forced into an update by the FBI.

            • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              The FBI can’t just force them to add malicious code. A bad actor could try to contribute bad code, but Signal’s devs would likely catch it.

      • Zachariah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        Interesting. Are the server and client open source? Is a self-hosted server interoperable with the main ones?