I’ve been inspecting this topic quite a lot and I’m a little confused now. So, we have reasons not to use Signal, reasons not to use Matrix, there were also some claims about Session being a fraught. Briar is mostly activists related (not very suitable for daily use), XMPP lacks good clients and suffers from fragmentation of protocol standards implementation, SimpleX is too feature-incomplete (no UnifiedPush support, big battery drain on Android, very decent desktop client without any message sync). I can’t say a lot about Threema or Wire, as I’m not very familiar with them.
So, my question is — is there any good private messenger at all? What do you think is the most acceptable option?
EDIT: In addition to my post:
All messengers have their flaws, I’m well aware of that. I was interested in hearing users’ opinions regarding these shortcomings, not in finding the perfect messenger. I may have worded my thoughts incorrectly, sorry for that.
You must log in or register to comment.
XMPP lacks good clients and suffers from fragmentation of protocol standards implementation
- For Android: Conversations is excellent, also on F-Droid if you don’t want to use the Google store.
- For iOS/MacOS: Siskin or iOS/MacOS: Monal.
- For Linux/Windows: Gajim or Linux: Dino.
“Protocol fragmentation” is not a valid complaint about XMPP – it’s like complaining that ActivityPub is fragmented; but that’s not a problem: you use the services (Mastodon, Lemmy, Kbin, etc) built with it which suit your needs, mostly interacting with that sector of the federation (eg, Lemmy+Kbin), but get a little interoperability with other sectors as a bonus (eg, Lemmy+Mastodon).
I fucking love gajim (but I call it Gaijin because it’s funny to me.)
Almost all those can be self-hosted, and built from source, so matrix, xmpp, simplex, are fine. Don’t use anything that’s uses a centralized server in a five eyes country, like signal or threema.
How is Threema in a five eyes country?
I mean, sure, only the clients are open source. Don’t use it for that.
Kind of limited due to there not being an iOS version, but Briar is pretty decent. It was made to be usable in repressive areas by press and other groups, as well as in areas where bad weather has taken out cell and regular wifi. Can be used with phone data, but also offline via ad-hoc wifi and bluetooth. But stuff like Signal and SimpleX are more overall useful to more people (and I think SimpleX also supports offline local immediate area of each other like wifi and bluetooth but I don’t remember atm).
I don’t think Briar could be on iOS due to Apple TOS.
Not as great of choice from a security perspective
XMPP clients are fine albeit it all, as many as they are, slightly different as is the nature of the protocol. This just means there is value in contributing to existing clients, creating new clients, or embracing progressive enhancement (which most do for example with emoji reactions just being a quoted text reply & so on) & complete feature parity is a fool’s errand if you want an exensible protocol with diversity & experimentation in the community. With the broad exception of the Conversations Compliance, there isn’t a flagship client & instead the best ideas come to the most used or most innovative clients. I use Cheogram, Profanity, Gajim, Dino, Movim at different times (& would love to create my own). The protocol is stable, healthy, & ready for proposals for improvement.
If I compare this to the more-expensive-by-all-metrics-to-run Matrix, if it ain’t Element, you gotta problem since a vast majority of users are on it & using all of its features & no other client has anything near parity but are expected to have parity instead of allowing things to sometimes be gracefully missed or shown in a less than ideal manner as acceptable. This hurts experimentation. Good luck trying anything similar to GDPR when all nodes are design & required to duplicate all messages & attachments for all users to every server anyone in it comes from.
The only real gotcha is the same gotcha as Matrix when using multiple clients with double-ratchet encryption (ala Signal) is that clients will expire keys that haven’t been seen in a while & is hard to get both devices retrusting one another. Turning it off & on again rarely works & requires fiddling on both ends sometimes. I really should just use PGP for encryption more often…
There’s no such thing as private on the internet. Sometime after the nineties everyone forgot that.
You’re confusing privacy with anonymity.
No I’m not. Google up police cracking criminal crypto wallets. These kinds of responses are exactly why this question got asked.
Cynicism is a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Do you need links to police cracking people crypto wallets. That’s about as secure as you’re going to get now and it’s still not enough. So what else have you got.
There is no such thing as a binary choice between “absolutely private” and “absolutely non-private”.
This is not binary like this either. There are a TON of variables.
- You can have the IPs you communicate with visible to your ISP directly, or hidden from an ISP but visible to a VPN, or hidden from ISP but visible to the Tor network, the safety of which depends on “against whom”.
- You can have your messages encrypted in transit but visible to the messaging server, or encrypted end-to-end and thus useless to the messaging server too.
- You can have the identity you post under bound to an identity outright, or you could obfuscate that.
- You can use a centralized messenger that has your whole communication graph and all metadata, or you can use a federated one with multiple identities and thus metadata scattered across multiple places. Or Briar that doesn’t have servers at all.
All depends on whom you want to be private against, as well as how much effort they want to put into getting your information. There is no “absolute privacy”… But there is “requiring more effort from the chosen adversary than you’re worth”.
You’re either connected or disconnected. There is no in between. All you can do is toggle between them and hope no one is paying attention.
DeltaChat. I don’t use it myself because it’s built on electron (which basically excludes 99% of modern chat clients); but as it’s technically an email client turned into a chat client, we can assume you’re protected by PGP when writing to most users, and with the added effect of not needing to convince anyone to install anything since from their end it’s just an email.
protected by PGP
Someone here recently linked to this gem https://www.latacora.com/blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem/
The article warns PGP over Email is a safety concern. They suggest Signal instead. (And several other tools to replace PGP)
E-mail is horrible for privacy, spam, instant messaging, etc. PGP “works” in very limited scenarios, and e-mail is not really one of them.
Plus these two statements seem unplausible for me:
we can assume you’re protected by PGP when writing to most users,
and
and with the added effect of not needing to convince anyone to install anything since from their end it’s just an email.
I disagree with the first statement, most users don’t know what PGP is and therefore don’t have keys, so you can’t encrypt anything to them. The only way most users would use PGP is if something sets it up for them, alá protonmail or my using some special client. Since you’ve said that from their end it is just an e-mail, how does Deltachat add any meaningful encryption?
This comment is a great start for what you’re looking for.
I’m using simplex without problems. I get all notifications and didn’t notice an increased battery drain.
good messenger for what?
if you want a solution for you and a bunch of your henchmen to coordinate and discuss totally-not-crimes with ephemeral comms, practically any E2EE solution will work; once the not-crimen is done, burn your accounts and toss the devices for good measure and you’re scot free.
if you want a secure messenger that’s part of a widely used communication platform where you can also do normal people shit and also convert normal people to actually use it (think getting contact deets from cute boy/girl at a bar or giving yours to a business correspondent without an elaborate powerpoint presentation on how to use it) and you want to enjoy the fruits of 20+ years of continuous IM development, like having top-notch UX, battery efficiency, network resiliency, quality voice/video calls, etc., without being spied on then such a thing doesn’t exist.
how come? meredith baxter recently stated that it costs signal $50MM/yr to run their infra. that money has to come from somewhere. if there are no advertising dolts dumping cash on spying on your social graph and convos, the remaining avenues for financing are few and far between.
in closing, there aren’t any super awesome messengers you weren’t aware of, everything is shit.
Snikket is an attempt to solve the XMPP issues, or at least to reduce them, single all-in-one XMPP server distro and clients across platforms, and since it’s self-hosted no one should get their hands on your data (in normal circumstances).
That said, the saying goes “Perfect is the enemy of Good”. Just because a solution is not perfect doesn’t make it unusable, any of those options you mention full of problems are a helluva better than FB Messenger or plain SMS for example. Depending on your threat model they might be more than enough.
I don’t consider those comments regarding Matrix as problematic. Don’t use someone else’s server if you don’t trust them - including a third party lookup server.
/selfhosting Matrix
There’s a 90% chance the other end of your conversation will be with someone on Matrix dot org or a server they host for a organization. Like email, your other end is likely still using Google or Microsoft so the metadata & anything else unencrypted is going to be synced back to the centralized server.
The article he linked specifically mentioned that the data is sent to matrix’s servers even when using a self hosted server though
… if you configure to use their lookup server.
jami has so much potential. just wish it ran a bit more reliable
Dead drops and one time pads.
Set up a numbers station if you can afford it.
People say this over and over “depends on your threat model” and yet people seem to have a hard time understanding that. Your threat model is “who is your adversary and what he is willing/able to do”. Your security goal is what do you want to keep from your adversary.
As others said, if you are an activist or sth important, perhaps you might want to build a working knowledge of cryptography yourself. If you just want META not being able to see your NSFW chat with your romantic partner Signal might be more than enough. In fact, people way more relevant than me also suggest that Signal is good even for bounty hunter vulnerability reporting.
Having said that, what bugs me most is that people think the instant messaging format as suitable for everything: activism, jobs, crimes, broadcasting 1970’s prog rock for extraterestrials , whatever lmao. Do you really want to use your phone for all that? Like, just carrying the phone around in the first place nullifies your other precautions, for all advanced threat models beyond privacy of non-critical social messaging.
Persistent/resourceful adversaries can eventually get to you, using a set of penetration and intelligence techniques, which means, if you are involved, the convenience of messaging your partners in crime from the phone in your pocket while waiting for a bus is a convenience you probably can’t afford.
It’s impossible to escape the surveillance of those three letter agencies. We only got a brief glimpse into the other side of the curtain back in 2013, and there is no idea how advanced their surveillance technologies are, so why bother for a normie?
It’s also painstaking if not impossible to wipe all your metadata from the internet, which can later be mined to infer personal data and sold by data brokers. Not to mention that people have jobs and use their credit cards, no way even to hide the most important personal identifying information.
So using Signal, despite being centralized, is not too bad at all. Very few people can totally sacrifice convenience for privacy.
