- cross-posted to:
- signal@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- signal@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Nice. I don’t think I need this but its good to have options
Cloud backups, for security!
If anyone is actually going to get that right in a mainstream product, it will probably be Signal.
Year according to a wiki page on the unofficial Signal wiki the backup will not be directly linked to the user “It appears that backups will not be directly linkable to a user. Authentication for operations against a given backup will use zero-knowledge proofs.”.
As long as they leave the local backup option that sounds like a good idea to me.
Finally a good approach at raising money (other than donations)
I don’t mind paying a fair price, for a service, so they should go for it. I use both Signal and Telegram, and I would pay for Telegram too, if the price was more fair…
Don’t use Telegram, let alone pay for it. So many red flags with Telegram.
Feel free to list them - with evidence and not just prejudice…?
- No end-to-end encryption by default, you have to explicitly start a secret chat. That means that instead of it all being encrypted noise, secret chats stand out.
- Servers are not open source (last time I checked). Why not? Seriously, why not?
- Admittedly, not much of an issue any more, but in the beginning they had horrible security (so did WhatsApp until Facebook threw some competent engineers at the problem)
There’s end-to-end encryption. It’s fine that you can chose what needs to be private, and what doesn’t need to be.
There could be several reasons as to why the servers are not OS. Why do you need that part to be OS? Seriously, why?
Oh, so your problem with Telegram is, that it had some issues in the past, just like EVERY other app in the beginning? Nice one. :-)
So, let’s summarize.
- You lie, and say that there’s no end-to-end encryption when there is.
- It would be preferable to have OS servers, but it’s not a major issue, since everything else is.
- You have an issue with something in “Back to the Future”… Which is no longer an issue.
Woot?! (not op),
- He said “no e2e by default” which is true. Straw man/missrepresentation
- You post on the fediverse, which is decentral - why shouldn’t you want this for telegram too? Open source server would allow to check / trust code, host your own, be more resilient against central attacks/malicious intend. Also you just waved it away saying it is not a biggy - maybe to you.
- Last time I checked telegram still has major trust issues for me. No way to know how much governments are involved, code is not independently checked for security (happy to be proven wrong on especially the last one)
Its totally fine that you like telegram, but you can do that while acknowledging others preferences
- it’s not true. Default calls are encrypted.
- I have not said anything about what I want for Telegram. Are you trying to make a straw man here? Not that you want to interject yourself into this debate - then tell me, what is the big problem with the serverside not being OS? I did write it would be optimal, but what is the big issue for you? Try to answer without making another straw man about something I didn’t say… ;-)
- I don’t care about your trust issues. Go deal with them…
So far, don’t you think that you really would know, if government was involved in any way that didn’t involve crime fighting? Do you prefer an app, where crime roam free? Is that your issue? That it doesn’t?
AFAIK it’s you and two others, who don’t acknowledge my preferences… So please consider following your own advice!
You lie, and say that there’s no end-to-end encryption when there is
That is not what I said. Please take a deep breath, maybe go outside for a minute, and read my reply again.
First of all, you injected yourself in my debate with another person. You do it by answering for that person, which mean, you lie by default, since you don’t know that persons answers. Then you say there are no end-to-end encryption by default, but that depends on what you use it for. Calls are encrypted by default.
But nice to know that you really didn’t have any serious red flags. Now it would be nice to hear from the person I was originally debating with…
Ah sorry. I thought you were here on lemmy for an open discussion and polite, good-faith arguments, not just trolling and name-calling. My bad.
Price is fair but features aren’t worth it.
You contradict yourself. You can’t say that the price is fair, for something that doesn’t have the features that the price should cover.
Makes sense., something as huge and expensive as Signal can’t run entirely on donations.
Sure it can, just look at Wikipedia. But it’s probably a good idea to have some alternate forms of revenue generation.
Wikipedia has way more donors, since it’s basically the only one of its kind. There is no Big Tech alternative to Wikipedia, so everyone just uses it by default. There are lots of other messengers though, so Signal isn’t the default choice.
Wikipedia has a lot more donors, but also their costs are probably cheaper than Signal. They mostly host text and decently compressed images, Signal uses way more bandwidth and people share high quality videos and other huge files. The servers are very expensive, there were articles estimating their cost to be around $50M per year.
Good to see they have some reasonable revenue streams lined up.
At least this time they do it out in the open, not like with the MobileCoin integration.
If this feature rolls out but you can’t pay for it. You can always use Molly (fork of signal). If you can support the project than do it. But if you can’t than don’t force your self
Switching to Molly won’t necessarily give you free cloud backups. Someone will still need to pay for the storage costs.
I was saying local backup
Ah, misunderstood your post. I think regular Signal still supports local backup. Doubt they’ll remove it when they add this.
Maybe lets see what happens
As long as they dont shove it down our throats, and then expand and expand and expand the features that are in their paid tier, and make you feel lesser for choosing their local only unpaid mode, and dont make the unpaid mode inconvenient with dark patterns.
Its happened too much, I’ve asked my friends to hop through so many different platforms over the years and decades
It always starts with something thats reasonable, and every time thus far, it expands into something I hate.
Glad to see they are establishing useful streams of revenue
I, however, will continue using Molly in combination with Syncthing
Interesting, how do you use syncthing with molly?
Well, if you didn’t know, Molly is a soft fork of the Signal Android client.
But, I think both support making local backups of your chats.
I do so daily and keep two copies. These get synced in real time to my little NAS and/or my PC/LaptopThanks, I do use Molly but never occured to me to use Syncthing to make a local backup copy. Great idea.
Glad to be of help! I personally really like Syncthing, since it makes implementing a resilient decentralised backup strategy quite easy.
Though I would recommend you go with “Syncthing-Fork”, as iirc the “vanilla” app was put into maintenance mode or smth like that
And another good tip - thank you!
I have no issue with this, I personally wouldn’t use it but I get that they need to make money (which is why i have a recurrent donation every month).
If this helps them to do that, then so be it
Like cloud backup on their server or a subscription just to export the files to store offline?
I think it’s cloud backups.
In the GitHub commit it’s called Renew your Signal Backups subscription.
Signal backups are an issue. They keep growing. I need to look into a solution sooner or later that isn’t just buying a phone with more space. I’d like to find ways to reduce the size and keep managing the backups myself, but that’s gonna take time. If they offer a secure, private, and affordable service, I’d prolly just redirect my donations to that.
It would be nice if the backups were split into time-indexed files so I could move the old parts to cheap external hard drives and only keep recent backups on my expensive phone storage.
Agreed. Would be great if we could save old backups on a server and search it from a client, instead of the current option of keeping everything in one local backup. The latter is a real problem after a while if you have contacts that like sending videos.
I imagine search of server backups would be pretty hard to do securely. Better management of locally stored media would be nice, but you can sort by size, export, and delete media from inside the settings.
I was actually unaware of those features and thinking of an over engineered solution. Good lookin out!
honestly thats why I don’t like signal and simplex for people who send lots of images. something server-based is much more suitable for them, like Matrix. that is, if their apps were more stable. there’s also the security about metadata, but for most people that’s probably not a huge concern
Excellent news honestly. Trying to get people to switch to something encrypted and the one thing I’ve thought of is that I want to know it can continue indefinitely. Everything else in life costs money- we just never think of it computer wise because we pay with our data and privacy.
This can join threema with a solid revenue stream. I back mine up locally but would pay for this anyhow.
