I’m not sure if it is entirely accurate to compare them in this way, as “Matrix” refers to simply the protocol, whereas “Signal” could refer to the applications, server, and protocol. That being said, is there any fundamental difference in how the Matrix ecosystem of federated servers, and independently developed applications compares to that of Signal that would make it less secure, overall, to use?

The most obvious security vulnerability that I can think of is that the person you are communicating with (or, conceivably, oneself, as well) is using an insecure/compromised application that may be leaking information. I would assume that the underlying encryption of the data is rather trustworthy, and the added censorship resistance of federating the servers is a big plus. However, I do wonder if there are any issues with extra metadata generation, or usage tracking that could be seen as an opsec vulnerability for an individual. Signal, somewhat famously, when subpoenaed to hand over data, can only hand over the date that the account was created, and the last time it was used. What would happen if the authorities go after a Matrix user? What information about that user would they be able to gather?

    • Blizzard
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are moving away from phone numbers.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not really. They are moving away from requiring the phone number as a user identifier during normal usage, but they have shown no indication of moving away from phone numbers as a sign up requirement.