We estimate that by 2025, Signal will require approximately $50 million dollars a year to operate—and this is very lean compared to other popular messaging apps that don’t respect your privacy.

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    They could save a lot on infrastructure costs if they decentralised their network and stopped using phone numbers as unique identifiers.

    • Alex@feddit.ro
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m all for decentralised networks, but they do have their flaws. I use Matrix every day, and there are a lot of times the keys need to be resent, messages don’t get sent or deleted on shaky internet, etc. Issues like this make it seem broken to normies. Signal Just Works™️

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Absolutely, and I use Signal for a few things. It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s far better than most (looking at you, Facebook’s WhatsApp, with your previous Pegasus attack vector).

      • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Signal Just Works™️

        Until you drop your phone in the swimming pool, and every message/photo you’ve ever received is just… gone. Forever.

        Sorry but I don’t buy any claim that Signal “just works”. It’s pretty clear they care about security more than anything else even when that means making decisions that are user hostile. And that’s fine - if you feel like you need that level of security I’m glad Signal exists. But it doesn’t really align with the general public and Signal is never going to be a mass market messaging service unless something changes (Signal or the general public).

        What’s weird to me is an app that excludes itself from phone backups considers SMS a valid form of authentication when a user links a device to a phone number - especially when you can necessarily link a device to a number that is already tied to someone else’s device. Like how is that ever going to be secure? Spoiler: it’s not. It’d make a lot more sense to me if users simply crated a username and shared it with other people instead of a phone number… and if they forget their password… come up with new username.

        • slowbyrne@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Signal provides a backup option. The auto backup for SMS on android is provided by google and likely uses google drive. I don’t know for certain but I would guess the encryption options and security of that route would be impossible to guarantee and the public backlash of signal users knowing their data was being sent to Google’s servers would be massive.

          I’ve setup my signal backups to a local folder on my phone. I then have SyncThing running on my phone and home computer so it automatically gets sent once it’s created.

      • Zworf@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes but you still need one and you still lose access to your account if you lose your number.

      • kpw@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        There’s an IETF internet standard for federated messaging called XMPP. Just be compatible with the standard. It also allows for extensions if you offer more than the core spec.