197
GitHub commit d7447b1 states that “accounts without phone numbers can never get phone numbers, and accounts with them can never lose them”.
So you’ll have to register a new account if you want to decouple your number.
didn’t they announce this like five years ago
At this point, if it’s on a phone app, it probably doesn’t matter. They have your number.
It's not entirely dystopian (just barely), we have newer messengers like SimpleX and DeltaChat (I/we use Delta) on the up and coming which deliver on all the same e2ee promises as Signal. It's just network effects as usual, getting people to try is the real hurdle.
What they share in common (mostly) is the architecture - they're built natively decentralized, utilizing caching relays with no single source of truth, or device of truth, to be used to create a profile of you like a phone number does. Encryption keys owned by the user and no single servers. Generally this is the Nostr design as well, so we have 3 different teams all focusing on the same natively decentralized architecture patterns.
Is any of these apps good for phone calls or video calls, or just text messages?
At this rate Canada would probably ban anything they can't get records from eventually if it got popular enough. I hate this timeline.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I started self-hosting xmpp recently, and the calls work perfectly! You don't need to self-host either, there are plenty of public servers.
I tried XMPP but could not find a client that let me have a "video call" where I could share my screen without also needing a webcam. Or even have a video call where not everyone is forced to have a video flux. As far as I can tell an audio call cannot be turned into a video call for 1 streamer.
Like in Discord where one want to share its screen while playing. XNPP was my biggest hope to replace Discord with my friend but I either did not find the correct client or the ecosystem is not mature enough (or oriented in the direction I expected).
Yeah, screensharing is not a thing in most clients, but I think it's a matter of time (years?) before it's properly implemented. In the meantime, you can use jitsi meet? Not sure if it covers your use case. I'll just copy this reddit comment, which has some good info:
Yes, it’s possible, but with some limitations. For video calls between a Linux and a Windows client using ejabberd, you need an XMPP client that supports WebRTC. Some options: • Dino (Linux) – Supports video calls but no screen sharing. • Gajim (Linux/Windows) – Can do video calls with plugins, but no screen sharing. • Jitsi (XMPP mode) – Supports WebRTC and screen sharing but requires a separate Jitsi server. Since most XMPP clients don’t natively support screen sharing, you have two main options: 1. Use Jitsi Meet, which integrates with XMPP and allows both video calls and screen sharing. 2. Use OBS VirtualCam (on Windows) to share the screen as a “camera” in a video call. If you want a fully functional setup with both video calls and screen sharing, setting up Jitsi Meet with ejabberd is the best approach.
An XMPP client embedding jitsi meet or having a plugin for it could be an option.
Arcane chat (a delta chat client) offers video/audio calls as well
Delta has it native.
Must be a newish update.
I think it is. I don't remember seeing it before.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Don't forget Briar!
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
No, apps (at least on Android) require a specific permission to read your phone number. The phone capabilities of Signal go through their own VoIP service, not your phone.
I mean, they also were developing usernames five years ago AFAIK. Adding usernames for everyone was the hard, but necessary step they finally managed to do. Only now is it possible to make accounts that are discoverable AND aren't tethered to phone numbers. I'm assuming with passkeys/TOTP(?)
Bullllllllshit.
They've said that for years. It's easy to do. But they won't do it
How's it easy?
Not the technical part (which definitely looks as easy as just dropping a requirement), but the spam/abuse prevention part.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
just go the matrix route; username, password, 2fa, then any other connection requires you to verify with a current logged in session (or recovery code).
Cannot decrypt message
As someone who uses matrix and runs a matrix server, matrix fucking suuuucks jfc why are so many privacy tools soooooo bad at what they do on so many levels like wtf the proto the servers the clients the ux the metadata issues like so much wrong
Edit: and if anyone tells me to use XMPP I'll slap them
What are your main issues with Matrix?
load more comments
(1 replies)
I don't understand why an email registration is not an option? it was the default from when online services and apps appeared in the first place, and until about 5 years ago (depending on types of services/apps), and it's security and anonymity was purely based on you using your "main" address or a throwaway.
The article says their main reason is spam/abuse, as requiring a phone number adds some sort of gate to lessen that. Emails are easier to create en-masse. I don’t agree with using phone numbers either, I’m just relaying their reasons.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I would guess the sudden influx of massive amounts of traffic would force them to charge for the service, and they don't want to do that. Requiring a phone number, while invasive to some, does cut down on a tremendous amount of automated/bot/spam traffic.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Boy... We are going to get spammed.
I never understood the "phone numbers are evil" people, whining about signal requiring them. As soon as this arrives, they will find another thing to whine about.
Hopefully Signal will make it possible to block any and all communications from people wohtout a phone number, unless I reach out to them. And that that feature also be introduced to groups. Because otherwise maintaining public groups is going to be turboshit.
mobile numbers require government identification in many countries. But yeah, not seeing an easy solution to the spam problem
mobile numbers require government identification in many countries
Yes and all they will know is "person A has installed signal". Nothing more. If you haven't degoogled tour phone or use one with a fruity logo, the government knows that you have the app already. It won't need phone number.
huh? you can't see the difference between a grapheneos burner linked to a gov ID backed phone number and one that isn't?
like what happens when you go to a protest and they pull out a Stingray and get your IMEI+ICCID down that's directly linked to you? you're telling me you don't see any issues with cops/ICE being able to know exactly who goes where?
this has strong "I don't need freedom of speech because I have nothing to say" vibes - it's fine if you don't see the value but I can assure there very much is
load more comments
(5 replies)
Remember metadata , they also know person A send message to person B at specific time. Of course knowing phone number also gives them your location from cellular towers.
load more comments
(1 replies)
simplex doesn't require phone numbers or emails to sign up.
instead you need to scan codes for a trust. it's actually everything I wanted in a messenger. well...I wish they had gifs like telegram.
load more comments
(4 replies)
SimpleX, Cwtch, Briar?
I think only SimpleX has asynchronous messaging
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›