Greetings!

A friend of mine wants to be more secure and private in light of recent events in the USA.

They originally told me they were going to use telegram, in which I explained how Telegram is considered compromised, and Signal is far more secure to use.

But they want more detailed explanations then what I provided verbally. Please help me explain things better to them! ✨

I am going to forward this thread to them, so they can see all your responses! And if you can, please cite!

Thank you! ✨

  • dengtav@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    This is unfortunately completely wrong, since you can learn from the homepage of matrix very own client Element, that its supported an trusted by a whole bunch of NATO Armys, including the US of course…

    I don’t mean by that you shouldnt use matrix, but arguing against signal with matrix is, in so many means, hilarious.

    The arguable, but professional cryptographer soatok discribes from a mathematical/cryptographical point of view, what it needs to be a Signal competitor, where matrix (and others) dont catch up (unfortunately)

    • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Used by a bunch of NATO armies isn’t the same as promoted by or made by. It just means they trust Element not to share their secrets. And that blog post is without merit. The author discredits Matrix because it has support for unencrypted messaging. That’s not a negative, it’s just a nice feature for when it’s appropriate. Whereas Signal’s major drawback of requiring your government ID and that you only use their servers is actually grounds to discredit a platform. Your post is the crossed arms furry avatar equivalent of “I drew you as the soyjack”. The article has no substance on the cryptographic integrity of Matrix, because there’s nothing to criticise there.