The privacy-focused messaging app arose from a fringe culture that emphasized individual autonomy and skepticism of authority. As it tries to go mainstream, can it escape its roots?
If you are required to give them information that they can use to figure out who you are, it’s not anonymous.
So if you are on normal post-paid cell phones, where you have given them your real info, or use a credit to pay for it with your name on it, etc. that means you aren’t anonymous.
So when super secret drug lord is caught, they can figure you were talking to this drug lord and charge you, because they have his end of the communications and can verify with your cell provider who YOU are.
Privacy just means they don’t know what you are saying. They may know you are communicating with drug lord but not what you are saying.
I think signal is a good inbetween because its privacy focus, even though it uses phone numbers. Which as you said and i agree with it makes it less anonimus however picking apart that it uses phone numbers. you could also dig deeper and say that using any app on a device not made by you could have spyware in the OS or in the lower level permissions (bios, firmware) aswell as what if a government agency made a honeypot server that uses the protocol for simplex as example such as arcane OS and how it was sold as the most secure phone which ended up being a honeypot. so i think its fair to say its secure enough for normies who want more privacy focused but not be mr.robot levels, which signal claims to be private which it is minus the use of phone numbers. but realistically if in the examples given, if you where to message a Bad actor and said bad actor was arrested and they used signal to message you. all they can get is that they messaged you which wouldn’t really hold up in court because although you where in contact with said person doesnt mean you where doing something illegal and if you dont incriminate your self (such as pleading the 5th) they really cant do a whole lot to charge you with something. which for those who know signal ownly knows the time and date of messages sent and online time as described in this artical https://www.dailydot.com/debug/signal-subpoena-privacy-gag-order/
If you are required to give them information that they can use to figure out who you are, it’s not anonymous.
So if you are on normal post-paid cell phones, where you have given them your real info, or use a credit to pay for it with your name on it, etc. that means you aren’t anonymous.
So when super secret drug lord is caught, they can figure you were talking to this drug lord and charge you, because they have his end of the communications and can verify with your cell provider who YOU are.
Privacy just means they don’t know what you are saying. They may know you are communicating with drug lord but not what you are saying.
deleted by creator
If you are required to give them information that they can use to figure out who you are, it’s not anonymous.
So if you are on normal post-paid cell phones, where you have given them your real info, or use a credit to pay for it with your name on it, etc. that means you aren’t anonymous.
So when super secret drug lord is caught, they can figure you were talking to this drug lord and charge you, because they have his end of the communications and can verify with your cell provider who YOU are.
Privacy just means they don’t know what you are saying. They may know you are communicating with drug lord but not what you are saying.
You can have neither, one or the other, or both
I think signal is a good inbetween because its privacy focus, even though it uses phone numbers. Which as you said and i agree with it makes it less anonimus however picking apart that it uses phone numbers. you could also dig deeper and say that using any app on a device not made by you could have spyware in the OS or in the lower level permissions (bios, firmware) aswell as what if a government agency made a honeypot server that uses the protocol for simplex as example such as arcane OS and how it was sold as the most secure phone which ended up being a honeypot. so i think its fair to say its secure enough for normies who want more privacy focused but not be mr.robot levels, which signal claims to be private which it is minus the use of phone numbers. but realistically if in the examples given, if you where to message a Bad actor and said bad actor was arrested and they used signal to message you. all they can get is that they messaged you which wouldn’t really hold up in court because although you where in contact with said person doesnt mean you where doing something illegal and if you dont incriminate your self (such as pleading the 5th) they really cant do a whole lot to charge you with something. which for those who know signal ownly knows the time and date of messages sent and online time as described in this artical https://www.dailydot.com/debug/signal-subpoena-privacy-gag-order/
deleted by creator
If you are required to give them information that they can use to figure out who you are, it’s not anonymous.
So if you are on normal post-paid cell phones, where you have given them your real info, or use a credit to pay for it with your name on it, etc. that means you aren’t anonymous.
So when super secret drug lord is caught, they can figure you were talking to this drug lord and charge you, because they have his end of the communications and can verify with your cell provider who YOU are.
Privacy just means they don’t know what you are saying. They may know you are communicating with drug lord but not what you are saying.
You can have neither, one or the other, or both
The person who responded to you explained it perfectly!