Even State Department-funded Human Rights Watch admits that authorities combine legal and illegal methods to obtain convictions: https://text.hrw.org/report/2018/01/09/dark-side/secret-origins-evidence-us-criminal-cases
Combining dragnet surveillance with device hacking is intended in the design of both tools. Hence, State Department-funded Signal dupes you into handing over your identity as part of the population-centric mapping. In custody, your phone will be hacked when it is taken away if it’s important.
https://xcancel.com/hannahcrileyy/status/2034273723667161480#m
The Prairieland case was an important case for the capitalist state of US Imperialism. It was a litmus test, a threat, to all people who dare criticize and challenge its rule within the belly of the beast. Just like the Iran war, which is about control over the region, and beating back any neo-colonial governments who don’t fall in line with the wishes of US Imperialism….this is the US government waging similar class war at home.
Privacy is proof of terrorism. The state, and it’s corporate allies, need to have access to your innermost thoughts, the things about you even you don’t know, for national security reasons. This is totally normal and not something to resist. Vote republican.
Non whites know they make up shit all the time to put people in prison, nothing new here for the shit hole country
The places tyrants can’t see into is where the threats come from.
I really don’t get the big “use signal” push at this point in time because even if it’s private and the encryption is solid, it’s a fucking American company. It’s so easy for letter agencies to get information on their users from them, don’t you realize that they can’t refuse to give out your number if they ask for it and that once they have that your identity and location are immediately and thoroughly compromised? If you are subject to US jurisdiction and could be seen in any way as opposing its government, I really don’t think you should be using it.
Because the other options most people are aware of are by and large even worse? Would you prefer people were sending this shit over Facebook messenger?
All giving out your number provides is that you have ever used Signal.
They’re saying ever using a private chat service is terrorism. That’s not really on Signal.
All your phone number provides is that you have ever used signal? Not what tower you’re connected to and therefore approximate realtime location? Your full identity via your telco? Social graph and history of your calls and texts?
I’m not saying it’s their fault or that they are volunteering any information, but that’s how it is for any US-based corporation (doesn’t matter if it’s a nonprofit, any legal entity that can be subpoenaed)
This is fundamentally not how Signal works, but you are generally correct in that a phone number has been shown to provide a lot of context for a person (or a device, at least). But Signal (the app) only uses a phone number for initial verification of an account. You have a lot of options to break that association with you - use a landline and get a call verification code, use a VoIP number (assuming you trust the provider), use a burner SIM, etc.
Once you have an account, you can choose to identify yourself on the network solely via username so the registration number is not presented to other users. The Signal protocol itself is well-audited and generally secure.
If your issue is with Signal the American company, use an open source fork like Molly with your own UnifiedPush instance. Then you’re only trusting them with transport of your encrypted messages, which again have shown to be secure at least in public audits.
it all does not matter when most people register with their primary phone number that is already tied to their name
I still don’t get it. What is bad about signing up with your phone number? All readable Info that governments can force out of Signal is. “Yep this guy uses Signal, signed up last year” so nothing is lost (except if they use that as a sign you are a terrorist, but then they just wanted to monitor you anyway in the first place)
except if they use that as a sign you are a terrorist, but then they just wanted to monitor you anyway in the first place
exactly. what is the question?
also its not “monitor me” and “monitor you”, but “monitor whoever is using the service” more closely, and as it seems, retaliate against them.
The government already has access to every phone number in existence. They can already track every phone to figure out who attended a protest or whatever. Filtering down to “all phone numbers who’ve ever connected to Signal” doesn’t exactly narrow anything down. They don’t have any metadata about who you were chatting with.
The government already has access to every phone number in existence
They used to publish them in big books, even
government already has access to every phone number in existence
that’s precisely why you should not trust services that require it as private. phone number = identification.
plus apparently your government considers you a terrorist if you do.
If the only data surfacable from Signal is the phone number, not the crypto conversation, they didn’t source you on signal and get your number, they got your number through other means and used it to prove you use signal.
They can’t see the conversation to contents to supoena the number to id.
i’m convinced the big push for signal is a CIA op. not that it’s necessarily signal’s fault, it could be and it could not, but setting signal as the defacto private alternative is weird.
better than whatsapp at least i guess, but that’s a low ass bar to clear.
We know it’s an op, RFA does damage control for signal:
Libby Liu, president of Radio Free Asia stated:
Our primary interest is to make sure the extended OTF network and the Internet Freedom community are not spooked by the [Yasha Levine’s critical] article (no pun intended). Fortunately all the major players in the community are together in Valencia this week - and report out from there indicates they remain comfortable with OTF/RFA.
It’s not a company it’s a nonprofit foundation. And they’ve been audited many times by independent auditors.
Sorry but both points are irrelevant, nonprofit foundations can still be forced to turn over user information. That is part of following the law so nothing that would need to be hidden to auditors, unless you were talking about encryption audits which is completely besides the point
What data is there for Signal to turn over? Can you prove that they’re keeping messages or logs on their servers that have ‘disappeared’ from all the associated devices?
Your entire social network graphs, and timestamped message history.
No one can “prove” signal doesn’t store everything. If you give me ssh access to their server, then I can verify. Otherwise it’s “just trust me bro”.
If you give me ssh access to their server, then I can verify. Otherwise it’s “just trust me bro”.
What do you think an independent autit does?
But not the messages, and that’s basically all that matters
LOL no is not.
the irrededeemable fact that you are using it, which matters because the government now just targets all the signal users. they can’t read your messages, so they are applying guilt by association.
The audits determined they don’t have any user information to provide. You can see this in previous government requests where the only thing provided was a timestamp of last connection to the network.
and the phone number, which is clearly user information, now being used against the users
Because its one of the only popular secure methods of communication thats app based.
This is total alarmist misinformation. The “evidence of terrorism” was not “using Signal” or “carrying a first aid kit”, it was taking part in an armed assault on an immigration facility where a dozen people set off fireworks and shot a police officer with an AR-15.
The prosecution used the presence of the first aid kit they carried during their armed assault, along with actual messages (not metadata) from a Signal chat to make the case that the attackers planned on using violence.
There are a lot of problems with this case, IMO the most dangerous part here is that adds legitimacy the (false) idea that “antifa” is an organization that exists. Something the Trump administration has been struggling to prove. This X post takes small details out of context.
-
Don’t trust anything ever posted to X. Especially something that discourages the use of private messaging apps.
-
I highly recommend everyone report this this post to your admins and strongly recommend all instance admins ban/warn accounts like OP. If we want the fediverse to catch on it needs to be more factual, not knee jer.
it was taking part in an armed assault on an immigration facility where a dozen people set off fireworks and shot a police officer with an AR-15.
based
John Brown approves
Whoever they think did it They didn’t do it we were bowling together at that time
It’s true, I was the bowling pin
The prosecution used the presence of the first aid kit they carried
Insane bullshit.
I have a kit with me every day of my life, and I’ve had to refill it many times due to using it on others.
It would be pure coincidence that I happen to be carrying a first aid kit on any given day, and if I’m going to a peaceful protest I’m bringing my trauma kit because the entire fucking world knows how cops treat protesters.
If you were ever in such a situation, I’m sure your lawyer would present the fact that you always have a first aid kit with you to challenge it’s relevance. People who know you could be brought in to testify as such.
On the other hand, if you don’t generally carry a first aid kit but brought one to the protest alongside the other listed items, it does seem indicative of intent.
There was just a news story that Denmark was (among other activities) stocking up on blood supplies in Greenland. That’s not an unusual thing for a military to do, but it’s pretty obvious that they were preparing to fight US forces. That’s obviously not a crime, but the logical connections to intent are similar.
I agree that bringing a first aid kit to a peaceful protest is not evidence that someone is planning violence.
I disagree that bringing a first aid kit along with explosives and assault weapons to a planned confrontation is evidence someone was attending a peaceful protest.
You completely dodged the actual question. Is a first aid kit evidence of planned terrorism?
I’m saying by focusing on the irrelevant first aid kit you are playing into the hands of those who seek to discourage the use of private messaging apps.
I agree. You are the one that made specific comments about what carrying a first aid kit means for evidence that are completely irrelevant to the trial.
you agree it’s a distraction but continue to bring it up 🤔
At this point you’re just trolling 🙄
Depends on context. Is a fire extinguisher evidence of planned arson? Depends, was it just sitting there on its own or was it found next to a pile of fire accelerant, a box of matches, the blueprints to the nearby currently burning building, and a piece of paper with “Arson Plan” written on the top and “don’t forget fire extinguisher, just in case!” scrawled on the side? Obviously this is hyperbole, but I think my point is equally obvious.
They didn’t dodge anything. They answered your question quite clearly. The answer is context matters.
A first aid kit alone is not proof of that. The commentor did not claim that nor did the prosecution of the case. When taken in context with the other evidence and the actual actions they were able to use it as supporting evidence.
Now in my opinion their actions were based, but obviously illegal. If I were on the jury I would have let them walk, but that’s all beside the point.
The fact that anyone is even debating the (completely irrelevant) first aid kit means the disinformation campaign is working.
Shockingly I can proccess more than one view at a time. While I thought the first aid kit discussion was interesting I’m still aware of other factors of the case, I’m still aware that Trump is a child rapist, and I’m still aware that we are invading Iran.
Discussing something isn’t falling for a “disinformation campaign”.
Continuously steering a conversation away from the big important facts and towards irrelevant details is called “flooding the zone with shit” which yes, is a type of disinformation campaign.
And it only works if regular people take the bait.
No it doesn’t
I don’t think it was a question, really
along with actual messages (not metadata) from a Signal chat to make the case that the attackers planned on using violence
How did they get the actual messages? Signal chats and groups are supposed to be encrypted. I’m curious.
Most likely had someone in the group chat (opsec issue) or captured a phone and made the owner open it.
Thank you for this.
Thing is that there are actual privacy respecting messaging apps like SimpleX Chat. Signal isn’t one of them. It’s run by people associated with US intelligence, it’s hosted on a single server based in the US, and it actively harvests phone numbers. It’s incredible that people look at this and still claim it’s a private messaging app.
Police raised their gun first.
That doesn’t change what they planned to do before that happened.
IDK why it is alarmist misinformation to point out that the people doing this have the strongest spyware/phone cracking tools in the world, information about who owns phone numbers, access to AWS (a US military contractor currently being affected by a not insignificant missile-induced service outages), access to Firebase and Apple Websocket (latter has poor encryption and I have heard the former is also insecure), and the ability to physically bring you into custody, then lie about how they got all of these elements together in whatever order to get you behind bars. But of course the idea of actually doing something about the gestapo in your country just fills you with indignation apparently.
X is actually the only place that you can still hear from a lot of people, like Julie K Brown a Miami Herald journalist writing about Jeffrey Epstein’s associates and their victims, thousands of foreign journalists. That probably isn’t important to you since it isn’t about Star Trek and toys. I get all of the posts through a server called RSSHub combined with numerous other websites (like this one), which are piped directly into an actually secure messaging service. I encourage any admins to get my posts hidden from their entire instance. Don’t let your users come into my mentions! I wish that blocking instances actually WORKED. 💀
It’s alarmist to say that a jury decided using Signal is evidence of terrorism
Do you think they won’t do the same to my favorite apps?
CIA-funded outlet The Intercept here points out the CIA considers Signal software for terrorists and later recommended “highly-targeted individuals” use it (these are both endorsements to different audiences). Since e2ee software is viewed as a threat, how should we take the US govt singling out Signal for endorsement like this? Is the CIA being nice and helpful? https://web.archive.org/theintercept.com/2025/03/25/signal-chat-encryption-hegseth-cia/
The jury didn’t say using Signal was evidence of terrorist activity, though. That’s why it’s alarmist to say the jury said that - because they didn’t. At least, not to my knowledge?
-
They will come for all colors one by one until disliking the government is illegal.
A reminder that your phone number is metadata. And people who think metadata is “just” data or that cross-referencing is some kind of sci-fi nonsense, are fundamentally misunderstanding how modern surveillance works.
By requiring phone numbers, Signal, despite its good encryption, inherently builds a social graph. The server operators, or anyone who gets that data, can see a map of who is talking to whom. The content is secure, but the connections are not.
Being able to map out who talks to whom is incredibly valuable. A three-letter agency can take the map of connections and overlay it with all the other data they vacuum up from other sources, such as location data, purchase histories, social media activity. If you become a “person of interest” for any reason, they instantly have your entire social circle mapped out.
Worse, the act of seeking out encrypted communication is itself a red flag. It’s a perfect filter: “Show me everyone paranoid enough to use crypto.” You’re basically raising your hand.
So, in a twisted way, Signal being a tool for private conversations, makes it a perfect machine for mapping associations and identifying targets. The fact that it operates using a centralized server located in the US should worry people far more than it seems to.
The kicker is that thanks to gag orders, companies are legally forbidden from telling you if the feds come knocking for this data. So even if Signal’s intentions are pure, we’d never know how the data it collects is being used. The potential for abuse is baked right into the phone-number requirement.
In theory warrant canaries could have been used, but Marlinspike has an excuse for everything.
yeah that makes the whole thing even more sketch, I love how he never replies to the EFF link too
worn black to a protest
used Signal
carried a first aid kit
lol
The laws are made up and we’ve always been fucked. We always knew that
every goth tech nurse is a terrorist
Consider prison an organizing opportunity
We’re supposed to take privacy advice from someone posting on X?
Surprised that they didn’t link straight to Telegram.
- How does it feel to be on my nuts? 2. I get Telegram channels through RSS and let you work out the rest. I will if I want to.
Were you to be so lucky.
Lol this looks like the regular X app to you does it?
The domain of the person’s handle is literally “x.com”
Jitsi, Jami, and Simplex are all, I believe, peer-to-peer and don’t require you to trust an intermediary.
Jitsi requires authentication from big tech companies now, or at least person hosting call.
Wut
Thank you for pointing that out, It’s been awhile since I’ve used Jitsi. I’m currently using Jami and liking it.
Love simplex, also good if you have children and they have a tablet but not a phone
More anti-signal propaganda? Who is claiming it can’t be associated to a user. The messages are private, not anonymous.
It does use deniable encryption, but that stops working as a defense the second they take your phone and copy all logs from your device.
And large group chats relies on how well you can vet participants more than it relies on encryption itself, and if they’re too large they may as well not be encrypted.
That’s what Molly is for, right?
And graphene
Orgs in my town have seen this first-hand. People are out here learning secure comm practices the hard way.
Some people are very protective of Signal.
- Reason: Disinformation
- Reason: privacy rule #3: “Try to keep things on topic”
- Reason: Misinfo, alarmism
- Reason: This is harmful disinformation
Oh well if Dessalines says so it must be true
It’s davel
The essay being linked to was posted (authored?) by dessalines from lemmy.ml
You may have missed the sarcasm.
In custody, your phone will be hacked when it is taken away if it’s important.
Unless I turned off the USB port…
I wouldn’t bet my life on GrapheneOS in person despite being a fan of the project due to wanting to treat my phone as a computer
*actually forgot to mention they charged the duress password guy with destruction of evidence this isn’t speculative at all lmao
personally, my bet is that they don’t have anyone qualified enough to pull off an exploit like that (on me).
the problem with my bet: what we’ve seen is that they won’t care, and accuse individuals of terrorism based off the color of their clothes.
I just refuse to believe Google doesn’t have some kind of hardware backdoor, or that Motorola won’t once that is up and running.
They can turn it back on. Or they can apply some rubber-hose cryptanalysis.
What evidence do you have that Signal collects anything? Traffic logs from the app or something?
Signal doesn’t need to, you need to trust the whole chain. You’ll need to trust AWS, you need to trust Intel SGX, etc
The phrase “E2E encryption” definitionally means it applies when you don’t trust whole chain.
At that point you can rely on nothing but Tor or I2P
Nothing else hides metadata better than Signal, without involving large networks of independent nodes that participate in Sybil resistant routing. The only thing that gets close is threshold schemes where you still need multiple independent entities running servers.
It uses a phone number.
Phone numbers havent been required for at least like a year or so
That isn’t true. You still need a phone number to sign up.
Hm now I wonder what to do about that, as they have had my number for a while now.
Do they let you sign up purely with username and password? Or do they make you use insecure email?
You can check if a number is registered with Signal just by having Signal and starting a chat with that number
Even if the number is set as hidden in settings?
No, idk wth they’re talking abt
They changed that. You can make yourself undiscoverable by just the number now
This is as shady as Telegram to me tbqh
