It is not based on trust. It’s called “zero knowledge encryption” for a reason. You don’t have to trust them, because you give them nothing to trust them with.
Except that it is based on trust because you have to use your phone number to create the account, and you have to trust the company operating the server in regards on how that information is used. What part of this are you struggling to understand specifically?
The part that this is a false statement that you keep repeating. The phone number is associated with your account, that’s why it’s required to make the account.
The phone number is not associated with your account, it IS your account. In order for there to be metadata, there would have to be other data associated with it, which we’ve already established that there is not.
Your phone number is an identifying piece of information about the person who is sending and receiving messages. That’s what metadata is. The content of the message is the data, the identifying information is metadata. Maybe spend a bit of time actually learning about the subject instead of trolling here.
@yogthos@Ulrich It is also besides the point because whether he wants to call it metadata or not, Signal still has that information.
Signal might well share every subpoena they can. However, NSLs can come with gag orders. Even if they wanted to tell you what was going on, they couldn’t.
Exactly, what we call this information is entirely besides the point. What matters is that it’s being collected, and nobody outside the people operating the server knows how this information is used. If somebody says they trust Whisper and make a conscious choice to share that information with the company that’s perfectly fine. However, telling people that the problem doesn’t exist is dangerously dishonest.
Do you think if they were giving away extra information in NSLs and witholding that information in public subpoenas that no one would ask questions or hold them accountable for that?
Your phone number is an identifying piece of information about the person who is sending and receiving messages. That’s what metadata is.
It’s not. And I’m tired of repeating myself.
The content of the message is the data, the identifying information is metadata
Once again, no one has access to the content of the messages. Ergo, there is no metadata. Maybe spend a bit of time actually learning about the subject instead of trolling here.
Yes, you continue repeating a demonstrably false statement. A very astute observation on your part.
Once again, no one has access to the content of the messages. Ergo, there is no metadata. Maybe spend a bit of time actually learning about the subject instead of trolling here.
Once again, nobody is talking about content of the messages. What’s being said is that the identifying information about people sending and receiving messages is available to the server routing them. The fact that you continue ignoring this basic fact clearly shows that you’re the one who’s doing the trolling.
Okay, you’ve sufficiently demonstrated not only that you don’t know what you’re talking about but also that you have no evidence to back it up and your only recourse is repetition and personal insults so I’m gonna call it a night.
It is not based on trust. It’s called “zero knowledge encryption” for a reason. You don’t have to trust them, because you give them nothing to trust them with.
Except that it is based on trust because you have to use your phone number to create the account, and you have to trust the company operating the server in regards on how that information is used. What part of this are you struggling to understand specifically?
What part of “there is zero data associated with your phone number” are you struggling to understand, specifically?
The part that this is a false statement that you keep repeating. The phone number is associated with your account, that’s why it’s required to make the account.
The phone number is not associated with your account, it IS your account. In order for there to be metadata, there would have to be other data associated with it, which we’ve already established that there is not.
Your phone number is an identifying piece of information about the person who is sending and receiving messages. That’s what metadata is. The content of the message is the data, the identifying information is metadata. Maybe spend a bit of time actually learning about the subject instead of trolling here.
@yogthos @Ulrich It is also besides the point because whether he wants to call it metadata or not, Signal still has that information.
Signal might well share every subpoena they can. However, NSLs can come with gag orders. Even if they wanted to tell you what was going on, they couldn’t.
Exactly, what we call this information is entirely besides the point. What matters is that it’s being collected, and nobody outside the people operating the server knows how this information is used. If somebody says they trust Whisper and make a conscious choice to share that information with the company that’s perfectly fine. However, telling people that the problem doesn’t exist is dangerously dishonest.
Do you think if they were giving away extra information in NSLs and witholding that information in public subpoenas that no one would ask questions or hold them accountable for that?
It’s not. And I’m tired of repeating myself.
Once again, no one has access to the content of the messages. Ergo, there is no metadata. Maybe spend a bit of time actually learning about the subject instead of trolling here.
Yes, you continue repeating a demonstrably false statement. A very astute observation on your part.
Once again, nobody is talking about content of the messages. What’s being said is that the identifying information about people sending and receiving messages is available to the server routing them. The fact that you continue ignoring this basic fact clearly shows that you’re the one who’s doing the trolling.
Trolling or ignorant. Or a secret third thing.
JWZ has had to go through the same kinds of circular conversations.
Okay, you’ve sufficiently demonstrated not only that you don’t know what you’re talking about but also that you have no evidence to back it up and your only recourse is repetition and personal insults so I’m gonna call it a night.
For like 99.9% people, it definitely is.
What is what?