Re:Signal's TLS Proxy Failed to Be Probing Resistant
by bawolff on Friday February 05, 2021 @02:42AM
(#26034032)
> Because people aren't clairvoyant
Luckily they have a generic message to read. No clairvoyancey required.
I'm not defending signal here because i just like signal. Almost any other open source project would have responded the same way. Many would probably have been less polite about it. If you send a personalized note to everyone who reports a bug incorretly, you won't have any time to actually fix bugs.
Edit: i agree though that the false positive spam ban is a bit unfortunate. Shit happens sometimes. I maintain the generic message was totally reasonable and they should not do anything different in that regard if they could do it over again. The spam ban however was understandable but obviously should not have happened.
Because people aren't clairvoyant and it is reasonable to assume that people that post stuff on GitHub accept issues, just like the main Signal account does. The generic message, without original clarity in how to note an issue, is easy to interpret as being ignored. Especially as they had a false positive ban being flagged as spam. I understand Signal's pov and I understand DuckSoft's. I think Signal has the higher responsibility in clarity than some random person trying to note a flaw they found.
Look, you can like Signal and still think they made the wrong move. I've used it every day for years and converted the majority of my friends. No one expects Signal to be perfect.