So what's going on with Signal's new architecture that retains all user data? It seems like a total reversal of their previous stance and one that dramatically changes their threat model. Their new security properties rely entirely on SGX, which is barely secure against motivated home users, much less nation state adversaries.
@th ... that's weird. Why would they do that?
@th What architecture? BTW I've been suspecting for a while now that Signal does not care about user privacy... There are a bunch of red flags. Also, I suspect they keep all messages (even if encrypted) kind of like Matrix does. You can fetch messages that are ages old on any linked client even if all other devices are turned off. 🤔
@th That's interesting. Where can I read more details about it?
@th Could you tell me the name of that talk?
@th Moxie said publicly just this morning that they retain no user data.
@TheGibson @th that seems… odd, given the long and detailed blogpost about how they're going to securely store some of their users' data - so that users aren't totally reliant on their device being immortal, and other such perfectly worthy features.
Maybe he meant they retain no unencrypted user data? Or they retain no user messages?
I shouldn't say it was Moxie... but he was in the thread I was discussing it in.
@th Do you have a source on this change?
The UI patterns around this worry me as well. Previously, making an encrypted backup got you a key and 'please write down somewhere safe'.
This they have made pop up insistently above the interface, impossible to dismiss. Numeric by default. Then egging you for it afterwards to 'help you memorise it'.
The intention is clearly not to encourage a paper key or password utility. While some of their previous decisions could be seen as 'hiding the footguns from the end users', this is clearly the opposite…