• Capt. Wolf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    274
    ·
    1 day ago

    Just remember, no matter what way they spin this, they chose to ignore national security protocols and went out of their way to use an unsecure messaging app. That’s the real story. The witch hunt they’re undoubtedly going to go on is a perfect opportunity to redirect the public, save face, and further erode our freedoms.

    You know, SOP for the whole Trump regime…

    • SpaceShort@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Also, the reason we know about it is because Mike Waltz invited a journalist to a group chat.

      • bean@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        18 hours ago

        a snowball of stupidity if you will. Let’s see how big it grows… looks like it picked up momentum and size now with TG Signal hacked 🤡 ☃️

    • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Actually, I’m more surprised people continue to believe the ‘end to end’ claims of these companies.

      • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        89
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Signal makes it believable by providing source code and reproducible builds. It doesn’t rule out the possibility that they’ve done something clever with the random number generator, or have the app store you use give you a compromised app, or provide any protection against endpoint compromise, but it’s about as good as you can get.

        Third party apps derived from theirs, which explicitly promise to log all your messages to a server somewhere, like TeleMessage, are, for obvious reasons, far less trustworthy.

        • jaybone@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Question: how can they even claim it’s e2ee if they also claim to log all the messages? Or is the claim that they log the messages in encrypted form? In which case any client(s) with the only copy of the keys could delete them, making the logs useless.

          • merc@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            how can they even claim it’s e2ee if they also claim to log all the messages?

            Who are the various "they"s in that question?

            Signal claims that if you use the Signal app, it’s end-to-end encrypted. The Trump admin was using an unofficial Signal-compatible app TM SGNL which probably didn’t make those claims. And, Signal definitely never claimed that TM SGNL was end-to-end encrypted. In fact, it’s likely TeleMessage violated the copyrights and trademarks belonging to Signal with their app.

            But, in the end, the messages were still technically end-to-end encrypted. It’s just that as soon as the messages arrived at one of those ends, they were sent to TeleMessage who archived them unencrypted in AWS. It’s still end-to-end encrypted, it’s just that one of those ends is incredibly leaky.

              • merc@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                15 minutes ago

                Yeah. The level of incompetence is impressive. Full data and metadata for all customers all dumped together in one datastore, stored in the clear in AWS.

                “The data includes apparent message contents; the names and contact information for government officials; usernames and passwords for TeleMessage’s backend panel; and indications of what agencies and companies might be TeleMessage customers.”

                "The server that the hacker compromised is hosted on Amazon AWS’s cloud infrastructure in Northern Virginia."

                "“If I could have found this in less than 30 minutes then anybody else could too. And who knows how long it’s been vulnerable?” the hacker said. "

          • tamman2000@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            13 hours ago

            I don’t know how they claim that would work. But it’s important to note that only telemessage makes that claim, not signal.

        • xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          22 hours ago

          well they’ve also had great peer code reviews, and the reproducible builds lets you know they’re not putting a different version on the app store….

      • huppakee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Even with e2e security there is 2 e’s that can get compromised, their use of a altered version of the app on one end is enough to cancel out the whole encryption part it, also on the other end.

        But in this case it’s like they have a lock for their garage door that is different from the lock on their car so they can’t steal the car when somebody steals the key to the garage door, but then think they can leave the keys in the lock because there is a lock (encryption) on the doors.

      • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        Signal? Why wouldn’t they? Why would they want to claim E2EE, then steal people’s chats, and try really hard to make it completely invisible? Which would probably fail since it’s FOSS. Not everything is a conspiracy. Sure, they will sell user’s metadata eventually (if they aren’t doing it already) or become a paid app, maybe even add advertisments, who knows (nothing is safe from enshittification).

        TeleMessage is a different thing altogether. Their “claim” is pretty much the opposite: take a known E2EE app and make it completely transparent.