I wouldnât trust signal, but itâs no secret that Tor is partially or was funded by the US navy originally. Sometimes what benefits one agency of government also benefits the people. Donât confuse the need for the government to blend into and anonymously access web sites as something that was for your benefit, but that doesnât mean that they donât need you to achieve their objectives either. Itâs best when everyone uses Tor including your enemies.
Theres another technology that applies too.
# Court Docs Show FBI Can Intercept Encrypted Messages From âSignalâ App
The net makes us all experts on how we're enslaved, doesn't it ?
Lean towards solution instead, my friend.
A fox in a leghold will still find a way to survive.
Signal, Discord, Telegram, the pattern is the same, advertise privacy, 5 years later court docs show it was a trap from the beginning. Intel and AMD, iphone, chromebook, we have to assume they are all listening devices at this point. William Binney also says that he does not know why this does not result in an end to the illegal drug trade in the united states, as it seems they have no real interest in ending mafia, foreign spying, the crack and heroin trade. They only have interest in political repression and all of that data is shared with at least one foreign country en bulk.
What most people donât seem to have the ability to do is recognize who was correct from the beginning about distrusting these things, and then give the people who are correct over the long term credit for their skills at discerning what is going on. Far more often people continue to believe those sources that lied to them in all cases.
I wanted to add to my list of psyops, government operated entrapment setups, I have determined,
numundo.org and ecohackerfarm
âintentional communitiesâ like eastwind and the farm
hackernews
steemit
All of these are infiltrated and administered by spooks or the totalitarian government in one way or another, and this is the same government that let epstein get away with freely raping for 30+ years.
The idea âsecure communicationâ on a âsmartâ phone is something you should just forget. There may be ways to communicate freely on a properly configured computing device, but not a âmodernâ phone.
The input mechanisms themselves are comprimised. And should you order a privacy device like pinephone or system76, expect it to be diverted for a day or two to a black site to be implanted with something that makes it not that way.
The only viewpoint the evidence supports is that the united states government has determined there will be no privacy for citizens, unless you are a spy for a foreign country. And everyhing you say to any other human being, or to yourself, must be logged in your palantir profile for later analysis by cambridge analytica and foreign spies.
I hope this helps you.
Telegram is NOT secure and never was. Signal is probably not quite as broken as people are brainwashed into believing with some recent news, but I also donât trust it either. The problem is NOTHING that you rely on on current cellular phones can be trusted. If you are basing your faith around encryption when your device is compromised (hint: they all are) at a very low level out of the box you got a potential problem if the enemy you face has control of that. There are tools out there Iâd trust, but Signal isnât one of them. Telegram seems OK, but donât consider it secure.
If you want something a bit more secure Iâd probably look into Element and Matrix. See chat.lrn.fm for a server you can sign up with (itâs federated and semi decentralized) and just be aware that not every room enforces end to end encryption which is more complicated, but if setup should be more secure as can conversations be if you verify each others keys. Element isnât the easiest solution, but itâs definitely better than Signal and Telegram. Both server and client are in the control of the community and there is support for end to end encryption. Telegram you can get kicked off of if a government claims you are a terrorist or pirate or whatever. That isnât the case with Matrix because Matrix doesnât have that central component the same way other âsecureâ messaging platforms have. If you are forced to provide a phone # that should be your first red flag.
NOTHING electronic is secure. Especially from the government. To think anything is, is just foolish.
Being an absolutist is pushing fear, and it isnât very helpful.
No, not all electronics are insecure, the governments of the world use electronics and apparently at least have some success with codes.
You can build your own hardware, which is something any libertarian should be into.
Older cpus, open firmware systems, low tech, or otherwise crafty solutions have a good chance of providing some privacy.
It is apparrent that at the nsa level and a certain other country, wants to collect all wireless traffic and store it, and as quantum storage becomes more available, they will have the means to do so.
The needle in the haystack has at least some chance at success.
So âthe government knows everything!â is unhelpful fear porn, and absolutist, and as wrong as thinking windows OS is not keylogging you and sending everything you type to at least 100 agencies foreign, private and domestic.
As a writer interested in being read, this is a however, a feature.
I want the eavesdropping traitors to know they are in violation of their oath to the constitution and are awful people who suck at their jobs.
None of their spying on americans stopped epstein from raping did it?
Actual journalists they treat as enemies were the ones who did that.
Canât erase history, but they sure are trying, especially in this case.
Iâm not a techie or familiar with the ins and outs of Signalâs development, but I would take this critique of it by Yasha Levine with a big grain of salt. While it raises what sound like legitimate concerns, I wonder about the motives behind it. Read Levineâs critique of Shahid Buttar, who ran against Nancy Pelosi for Congress in San Francisco last year from the left â Levine doesnât like Buttar, or the Electronic Frontier Foundation he works for, essentially because s(he?) thinks they are too libertarian and not leftist enough, i.e. focused too much on government surveillance and wrongdoing, and not enough on the Silicon Valley corporations that Levine accuses them of being lobbyists for.