I have nothing against Signal. I just don’t have access to a phone number right now. I fully intend to use the Signal when I get a number. I know there is no silver bullet, no absolutes in the privacy world but I’m looking for any messengers that are generally considered to be private and secure on Android that I can try to convince my friends and family to use. I have a mid - low threat model, it’s just the thought of giving the Zuck anymore of my family’s data makes my skin crawl.

  • Nyanix@dataterm.digital
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Matrix is great, Element has a really nice UI for it. Signal also does work without a phone number, in fact it doesn’t really work for SMS anymore. Signal provides P2P for any communications with another Signal user. Matrix supports P2P as long as you set it up (encrypt a channel) and I think DM’s are P2P

    Edit: So Matrix is cool, End to End, NOT P2P, and probably the right decision for OP.

    • Hyperi0n@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      How do I use Signal without a phone number? Whenever I booted the app it needed a number.

      • Gravitywell@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        a work around I use is text verified.com , costs like 2 bucks and then you can activate signal. Catch being that you can’t reuse the number to verify again, so its only a temporary solution but I have setup a bunch of accounts that way.

    • On@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      did you mean E2EE? I don’t think signal is P2P. the signal server relays the messages in between users

      • Nyanix@dataterm.digital
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I apologize, I was thinking End-to-End. Though would someone mind enlightening me to the difference? Is is just multi-client support? Or that there can be a broker in between?

        Also, to everyone currently roasting me, here is what I was referencing

        • ivy@fedi196.gay
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          peer to peer means that the information goes from one “peer” (device) to the other, no middleman

          end to end encrypted means that the message is encrypted before transit and is then decrypted at the other “end” once it’s on the recipient’s device. end to end could have a server acting as a middleman, storing these encrypted messages, allowing for chat logs to be stored more conveniently and messages to be sent while one peer is offline.

          • ivy@fedi196.gay
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            this makes more sense if you understand public and private keys

            when encrypting a message, there are two keys. the public key can only be used to encrypt and the private key to decrypt. a recipient will put its public key out and a peer wishing to send it a message will use this key to encrypt it. once the message arrives, the recipient can use their private key to then decrypt the message

          • Nyanix@dataterm.digital
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Aaaah, got it, thank you so much for clearing that up for me. I apologize for my incorrect message then. From these comments, I’m inclined to say Matrix remains OP’s best option.

            Thank you for educating me! 😊

        • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          End to end means the users at the ‘ends’ have the keys to open the message and ‘middle’ is the server it goes through (that doesn’t have the key so it can’t read the message).

            • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              Yeah, basically you both need to be online at the same time for the other to receive message. Which, as you can imagine, can cause problems. Also I’m not sure you’d need encryption for P2P messaging? Maybe from the service provider?

              • yozul@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                A phone is a radio broadcast device. If you’re sending something unencrypted from it, anyone nearby can listen in to what it’s sending. Of course, it’s all compressed and sent with different protocols depending on what app you’re using, so it’s not trivial to read messages from everyone to everyone all the time, but if someone is determined it’s quite doable. SMS messages in particular are famous for having that happen to them, but it can happen with any unencrypted message.

                • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Good point, thanks for the insight. I was thinking p2p in the old school terms where there wasn’t anything to intercept over the air (even though we were obviously talking about phones, dunno why my brain defaulted there).

              • Nyanix@dataterm.digital
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                For some reason, I thought it was interchangeable terminology, I’m glad to understand better now. I could see a lot of P2P’s forgoing encryption then, since presumably you’re not hopping over any other devices or networks.