Hacker News Reader

Comment by agd | Hacker News Reader

There are always security trade-offs (especially when it comes to ease of use) but until you can show me a better app, which I can get my non-techy friends to use, Signal remains the best option for the mass market.

View on HN

Phone-number as identifier is pretty terrible user-experience choice. I am traveling and my phone-number has changed half-a-dozen times in the past year alone, my email has been the same for over a decade.

I tend to use Whatsapp because other people already have it but I have absolutely no motivation to use encourage other people to use Signal.

Edit: Whoever down-voted this, want to explain how this isn't a huge user-experience regression from giving your email and using gchat?

I presume phone numbers are only used for registration, I can chat with people that travel and change phone number and have registered the account only on one of them, am I wrong?

If you lose the phone with the installation you will lose access to the account permanently (or if you don't have the SIM card or it has been disconnected).

I have the same problem with Signal. Basically, I can't find anyone or be found because I rarely use my current phone number.

The phone number linking seems completely superfluous and has destroyed the user experience for me by preventing me from connecting with anyone else.

This design decision will become increasingly anachronistic in the near future, as phone numbers further diminish in importance.

You also have the reverse problem which is alluded to in the article, that a Phone number for a non-traveller, is pretty static and unlikely to be changed by the user often. However Email is more disposable and I can spin up and shut down email accounts that I could register with Signal et., al. for what I believe to be sensitive communications.

I feel that providers that use number-as-identity know this and use it as a way of assuring they have greater confidence of knowing their user, especially after everyone failed so spectacularly at real names policies.

> Phone number for a non-traveller, is pretty static and unlikely to be changed by the user often. However Email is more disposable

I entirely disagree. Even without traveling outside the US - my US phone-number has changed several times (change of carrier etc.); while it is possible to spin-up and shutdown email accounts (e.g. dummy accounts for services requiring registration) -- by this time most individuals should have a single serious account (and a larger percentage in the future): online bank statements, online bills, online shopping -- do you really not have a single primary account?

Why does your phone number keep changing?

Because that's how things are, at least in some locations. When you move to another city or state, you either suffer extra roaming costs (and incur some on your peers, as they'll be calling "long-distance" numbers even if you're physically close), or get a new (local) SIM/phone number. At least, that's what my experience is.

This must be even more true when moving to another country.

(Surely, there also must be some exceptions as well, where maintaining old number is an option.)

At least within the US, you're supposed to be able to port your number anywhere, so you don't have to change your number just because you moved. I don't know how this works in the rest of the world though.

That's fine for the mass market, but their lives don't typically depend on the security of their communications. For people who are targeted by bad guys (extortionists, kidnappers, terrorists) a considerably higher bar is appropriate. It is important that people should be aware of the risks they are exposing themselves to, and the fine article is a good step in that direction. Hopefully it can also help stimulate improvements in the landscape which ultimately save lives.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com