unskilled5117

What does Ente mean? 

In Malayalam, Vishnu's native language, "ente" means "mine". Thus "Ente Photos" has the literal meaning "my photos".

This was a good name, but still Vishnu looked around for better ones. But one day, he discovered that "ente" means "duck" in German. This unexpected connection sealed the deal. We should ask him why he likes ducks so much, but apparently he does, so this dual meaning ("mine" / "duck") led him to finalize the name, and also led to the adoption of "Ducky", Ente's mascot Source

Sure thing, never claimed to know if it violates the law. Thats for judges to decide.

I will copypaste, because this feature has been discussed a lot already.

The companies will get some general data if their ads work, without a profile about you being created. I am fine with that. Just imagine what a boon it would be for the “normal“ less tech savvy, if advertisers switched to a more privacy respecting technology like this. If more privacy focused people don't like it, they can simply disable it by ticking one box, without negative consequences (unlike content blockers and similar techniques where a website can penalize you, turned off PPA is not detectable). It has no downsides as far as I am concerned. It doesn’t give advertisers additional data that they wouldn’t already be able to get, it just creates the option of measuring their ads in a privacy respecting way.

Discussion about PPA from some time ago

This is hilarious and sad at the same time.

You continue to misunderstand the word “misinformation”. It is incorrect information spread without intent. A mistake made that leads to incorrect information spreading, falls into that category. Especially as it is in the starting point of the discussion, where sources should have been provided.

The need to feel victimized and a little bit of paranoia is strong in you, you should talk to someone about that. I am guessing that is caused by the lies and disinformation spread by your political party of choice. (I am only mentioning politics, because you brought it up with the feds conspiracy theory)

If you went and looked at my account history, you would see that there are a few comments in german and my account is registered on a german server and coincidentally I am German. So much for your fed theory.

My criticism has been nothing but constructive. I implore you for the future to do research using credible sources and to cite them, before making claims that could have a big impact. That goes for discussions on lemmy and as well in real life, when you are discussing or forming an opinion on an important topic.

I hope you get the help you need!

Oh sorry about that! Somehow missed that. Still weird by OP to claim systems are insecure just because vulnerabilities are discovered. That‘s the case for every system out there. Vulnerabilities are discovered and fixed. And mobile operating systems typically have stricter security features and permission management than Desktop OS.

Misinformation is the inadvertent spread of false information without intent to harm, while disinformation is false information designed to mislead others and is deliberately spread with the intent to confuse fact and fiction. Source

This is more than a simple mistake and I am right to call it misinformation. I appreciate that you seem open to discussion about you being wrong. Nevertheless your post is still not edited to correct the proven wrong statements. You can use strikethrough so no context is lost, like I did in the comment you are replying to, where I was wrong.

You made a post with huge claims, basically saying that signal is unsecure and messages can be read by the goverment. This is such a big claim that it should have been researched by you beforehand and you should have provided sources. You don’t get to hide behind “discussions” because in a discussion you actually provide sources if you make claims. Especially if you are trying to start one, to give the readers a chance to read up on the topic.

You “getting a detail wrong“ has a huge impact. Some people will stumble upon this post, read that signal is supposedly insecure and might believe it and even spread that. It hurts the adoption of a secure encrypted messenger. It is not a small detail, but the foundation of your whole post.

And I am mostly right, I just seem to have been wrong on the detail about Signal push notifications. […] This comes from the DOJ senator Wyden saying these corporations can secretly share this data with governments and can include the unencrypted text which is displayed in the notification.

No, you are mostly wrong about the claims you make! Again your post made the connection to signal. Push notifications for Signal NEVER contain sensitive unencrypted data & do not reveal the contents of any Signal messages or calls–not to Apple, not to Google, not to anyone but you & the people you're talking to. Source

"spreading misinformation" is a phrase mostly used by feds when they see something they consider to be "wrong think" or not "politically correct". They use this anti-misinformation campaign to support their censorship and mass surveillance system.

I don‘t appreciate you, trying to frame my correction of your blatant misinformation as trying to censor you. Don‘t try to play the victim.

Thanks for pointing that out to me, I wasn‘t aware of that.

That is an iMessage exploit, nothing to do with push notifications. He might be referring to this, which allows associating an account with an identity, but it’s not what he is claiming (content decryption) either. So as long as no sources are provided he is just spreading FUD

You are just spreading misinformation! Cite your sources!

There is a strategy used, which allows the government to find out who an account belongs to. They ask the push providers (Apple/Google) for data on the push token from e.g. a messaging app. This way they associate the account from an app with an identity.

Nothing there about message content. It is still safely E2EE.

~~I don’t know how it works in your country, but in mine, phone numbers are already associated with identities, so nothing gained as the gov can just ask signal for the phone number of an account, instead of having to ask signal and the push provider to get the identity.~~ (Edit: apparently it’s hashed, so there seems to be a use for this.) Signal isn’t about Anonymity but Privacy. There is a difference.

If you have another vulnerability cite it!

Cite your sources if you want to make claims like these! Until then you are just spreading FUD. There is nothing supporting your statement that i could find.

Wow, the whole argument of the article is basically: funded in part by US government = bad, and making a lot of assumptions, nothing more.

The fund is designated to: “support open technologies and communities that increase free expression, circumvent censorship, and obstruct repressive surveillance as a way to promote human rights and open societies."

One should question the commitment of a fund that dedicates itself to "obstructing surveillance", while being created by a government who runs the most expansive surveillance system in world history. And how the US might define the terms "human rights", and "open society" differently from those who know the US's history in those areas.

How laughable, that is not an argument, it’s nothing more than a guessing game, ignoring that there are different parts of government and different objectives can be true.

Signal's use luckily never caught on by the general public of China, whose government prefers autonomy, rather than letting US tech control its communication platforms, as most of the rest of the world naively allows. (For example, India's most popular social media apps, are Facebook and Youtube, meaning that US surveillance giants own and control the everyday communications of a country much larger than their own). Signal instead became used by US and western activists, and due to the contradictions of surveillance capitalism, also now its general populace.

You have to be kidding right? Championing china, which created a fucking surveillance state and is heavily monitoring the citizens, as an example?

Well then you‘ve said it yourself: “shortly after“ they were attacked. That is not really much of an argument.