No. It’s a wrapper around Signal that sends everything into a corporate cloud. The Isaraeli miltary/defense/espionage whatever have been using this, then sold it to a US company. I’m guessing the company provides wrappers around other apps as well.
It completely defeats the purpose of E2EE. I’m sure somebody told our oh-so-competent US government that’s exactly what they need.
Goverment officials are required to archive all communications, so it doesn’t defeat the purposes of E2EE because you can’t have full E2EE to start with. If it was propely implemented and didn’t get hacked it would be fine. Tho I guess implementation wise if it really sends all the data to a corporate instead of government cloud that’s a problem as well.
If it was propely implemented and didn’t get hacked
If it was properly researched and approved by DoD and used on authorized, secure devices which were running on secured networks, it would be fine.
The baseline for security has been pretty decent for years. It’s painfully restrictive which is why they’re chomping at the bit to make it easier, but just slamming a corporate product into use with secret data with no oversight has never been fine even if it was secure.
Wait they were using an unpublished fork of Signal?
No. It’s a wrapper around Signal that sends everything into a corporate cloud. The Isaraeli miltary/defense/espionage whatever have been using this, then sold it to a US company. I’m guessing the company provides wrappers around other apps as well.
It completely defeats the purpose of E2EE. I’m sure somebody told our oh-so-competent US government that’s exactly what they need.
Like, it’s actually worse than SignalGate.
So basically, they hacked themselves out of any benefit Signal was giving them, and then an external party finished the hack.
Not at all suspicious. \s
Goverment officials are required to archive all communications, so it doesn’t defeat the purposes of E2EE because you can’t have full E2EE to start with. If it was propely implemented and didn’t get hacked it would be fine. Tho I guess implementation wise if it really sends all the data to a corporate instead of government cloud that’s a problem as well.
If it was properly researched and approved by DoD and used on authorized, secure devices which were running on secured networks, it would be fine.
The baseline for security has been pretty decent for years. It’s painfully restrictive which is why they’re chomping at the bit to make it easier, but just slamming a corporate product into use with secret data with no oversight has never been fine even if it was secure.
They do provide wrappers for other apps too, I forget the name of the company but they provide them for WhatsApp, Telegram, and others.
deleted by creator
The hostile foreign governments are probably upset that the hacker revealed all these messages were being stored in plain text on AWS.
Then again, who even are the “hostile foreign governments” these days? Canada?
deleted by creator
Russia’s more a friend than hostile these days.
deleted by creator
Which Georgia, or both?
deleted by creator