Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol
by antocv on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @10:57AM
(#12901219)
Nope it isnt, its up to me as user to decide when to update, what Signal/other-app can do in such case is provide a simple in-app messaging system "Hey there was a vulernaribility, read more about it here in this message". Then user can decide.
And not "hey user, take this update which contains backdoors since the main developers got gagged/blackmailed, trust us this time for real".
Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol
by tptacek on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @12:01PM
(#12901868)
Again, the idea that Signal's developers were "gagged" or "blackmailed" is a lie, and you should be embarrassed to repeat it.
Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol
by styyle14 on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @04:05PM
(#12903936)
In a security sense, this is actually a very real concern with which even a warrant canary cannot help. Could you provide hard evidence that Signal's developers have NOT been "gagged" or "blackmailed"? I think such a proof would be infeasible at best.
[dead]
I imagine this is by design. What do I do if there is a vulnerability that a patch fixed but the person I'm taking to refuses to update?
I am not saying I like the idea of bricking an app if there's no update for three months but if you agree that the fight is against dragnet not targeted surveillance then this is a reasonable compromise.