Desktop support comes to Signal for iPhone | Hacker News Reader

Desktop support comes to Signal for iPhone

signal.org

56 pointssinak35 comments

As happy as I am that more people will use Signal thanks to the desktop integration, I am pretty sure I won't use it myself.

I consider Signal the only "secure" public way to communicate with me, and it's because it's restricted to a native app running on an unjailbroken updated iOS device, which puts the cost of exploitation in the 1M$ band.

Pairing it with a laptop, in a browser context, kind of defeats that use case. And WhatsApp is a valid alternative for convenience.

At least on the last go-round, the jailbreakers had the security patch before Apple released an update. Not disagreeing with you, just think it's an interesting distinction that you make.

>it's restricted to a native app running on an unjailbroken updated iOS device

But it's been on android longer than it's been on iOS?

He was discussing endpoint security so I believe he intended to say his own personal use is restricted to an iOS device.

Yeah endpoint security is generally worse on all desktop operating systems than iOS and Signal isn't intended to solve that problem.

One could run Signal Desktop on their Chromebook for a similar level of endpoint security to iOS.

mtgx mentioned this on the earlier thread, and I'm curious to know too (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12585597):

Have they said what are their long-term plans for the desktop app, now that Google has started deprecating Chrome apps?

https://blog.chromium.org/2016/08/from-chrome-apps-to-web.ht...

Fingers crossed they go with a saner native option like QT rather than a slow, crappy, wrapped web app.

Or platform specific versions using native tooling, sharing only what can be shared under the hood, and ending up with great apps?

Yeah, what am I thinking? I know that will probably will never happen, but it would be awesome if it did...

I haven't seen anyone from Open Whisper Systems speak out about this.

One of the things they like best about the current/deprecated Chrome app is the distribution and update model. I'm not sure how much that will affect their decisions about what direction to take.

Crypto community question - why is everybody so adamant about using Signal? Outside of work, I don't own a smart phone and refuse to, so signal is not an option. It's to the point where it's actually gotten in the way with getting in contact with at least three people I know.

> why is everybody so adamant about using Signal?

Because it's convenient, secure, open-source, and well-designed.

> Outside of work, I don't own a smart phone and refuse to

That makes you, in the eyes of most people, a weird outlier.

Not so weird. I also have a smart phone for work -- so i don't have a personal one.

Parent poster is probably talking about the fact that I willfully use a dumb phone. Though, I'm honestly not sure how a perception of being 'weird' is really relevant.

I dunno, it just feels that the crypto community is shooting itself in the foot by largely catering to those with smart phones. A huge chunk of population, (poor, elderly, etc) are in a similar boat as I am and it doesn't make much sense. Many of the civics/activist/crypto folk seem to only want to make flashy toys to prove their worth rather than tackling problems in solid ways :\.

What do you propose instead? Software for dumb phones? Meshes using SDR devices?

No - simply something that doesn't require specific hardware or a specific browser to run. Note that I'm not commenting on the lack of alternatives - just the current culture. It all feels very backwards.

I'm not aware of any "solid way" of reliably transmitting encrypted messages of any useful length within the 160 characters allowed in a single SMS message, let alone installing a usable method of encrypting the messages.

That's not really what I'm asking about, though. It just feels like those who truly need to use something like Signal are shooting themselves in the foot by requiring others to have a smart phone. This has affected my ability to communicate with two separate journalists, so I'm not just spouting just to spout..

You can use Signal on android.

Give Wire messenger a go, you don't need a phone number for it.

>Desktop support

Chrome Web Browser support.

That doesn't seem as good as Wire. Why should I bother with Signal?

https://wire.com/

Signal has been reviewed by more people. Snowden recommends it.

I think the better question is why should I bother with Wire? It's all of 3 months old, (and iOS is already on 2.0? Really?) Signal has been around for a few years now and uses a well-respected ratcheting encryption library similar to OTR. It's been well-audited and widely-adopted. It's already the de facto standard for FOSS E2E mobile messaging.

Wire has launched in 2014 with emphasis on encrypted calls, it was only recently open sourced.

It also ticks many boxes, only it's not decentralised and the server ain't open source (yet).

Signal/TextSecure was released in 2014.

Can you be specific about the "many boxes" you're referring to? The most relevant to the grandparent being: has it ever been audited?

They seem more friendly and open than the Signal guys. They're using similar encryption, go check out their GitHub for more info. It doesn't require a phone number and has multi-device encryption with desktop support. It has audio, video, pictures, sketching, likes, editing, deleting, groups, and more. Signal feels like a joke in comparison. Try it.

Wire is basically using the Signal protocol.

Seems like its failing to import contacts and groups from my phone? Anyone else having this problem? I can provide debug logs if that would be helpful.

I know a number of people how have had success with syncing but you may want to post your logs in Github or thumbs up if you are dup of https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-Desktop/issues/909

I've updated that issue with my debug logs, thanks!

What is the endgame for Signal? Now that its protocol has been implemented by several popular apps, will Signal continue to be developed?

"Use Signal. Use Tor."

Makes me wonder why they don't embed Tor into signal as an alternative (or fallback) way of connecting to the network.

It could be very useful in countries that routinely censor the web (including apps like signal).

I can't think of anywhere that blocks Signal but doesn't block Tor.

I think the OWS developers would probably be more interested in a system that can conceal metadata from the Signal server rather than pure network surveillance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com