Hey Folks! Someone in my family (Person A), has talked to a guy, who is working in the tech world, about if it make sense to use Signal, over Messenger, Snap, WhatsApp, with privacy in mind. The tech guy said, there is no difference, and that its not making sense to use it and that its almost the same. I know Signal is discussed alot here, but im now looking for some arguments, and facts to tell the one from my family, that the tech guy is wrong. What arguments can i use, why is Signal better in privacy, then the other alternatives? Person A, has always been sceptical about me beeing so privacy minded, and A thinks that there is nothing to do to protect, and is one of thoese saying : I have nothing to hide.

Edit: thank you for the help

  • @piyuv@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    114 months ago

    Show them this: https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/22/whatsapp-wins-reprieve-in-india-over-user-data-sharing/

    The dispute began when WhatsApp required users to accept expanded data sharing with Meta’s platforms or risk losing access to the messaging service. While European users can opt out of such sharing, Indian users cannot — a distinction that regulators found problematic.

    Meta doesn’t know what you’re talking about, because WhatsApp is e2ee. But they know:

    • who are you talking to
    • when
    • how often
    • what else were you doing before/during/after the talk
    • links that are shared (the preview fetch is not e2ee afaik)

    These are all valuable metadata and given enough of it, they can even infer what you were talking about. Target you with ads on their other platforms (but rumors are that WhatsApp will have ads inside eventually)

    • @GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      24 months ago

      (the preview fetch is not e2ee afaik)

      Technically, it is, but end to end encryption only covers the data between the ends, and not what one of the ends chooses to do with it. If one end of the conversation chooses to log the conversation in an insecure way, the conversation itself might technically be encrypted, but the contents of the conversation can be learned by another. Or if one end simply chooses to forward a message to a new party not part of the original conversation.

      The link previews are happening outside of the conversation, and that action can be seen by people like the owner of the website, your ISP, and maybe WhatsApp itself (if configured in that way, not sure if it does).

      So end to end isn’t a panacea. You have to understand how it fits into the broader context of security and threat models.

  • @superglue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    574 months ago

    Signal is the only app on that list whose app is open source. That means it can be audited to see if they are telling the truth.

    You cannot say the same for the others and you just have to take them at their word. Should we take Facebook at their word?

  • Rav Sha'ul
    link
    fedilink
    English
    244 months ago

    Whats’ app, while E2EE can still pull lots of information from who you message, how often, the size of the messages, and contact’s phone number. Messenger has the content of your messages and with whom you converse according to Facebook account info stored on Facebook servers. Snapchat has a record of all activity, contacts, and message content. The messages only disappear from app but not from SnapChat servers. All 3 of those record of how you live your life, except Whatsapp can’t see content of messages but still has your activities and contact phone numbers.

    Signal was ordered to turn over user content to court and Signal only had when the user last connected to the service and date of account creation. Signal had zero information about messages, when messages were sent, or to whom.

  • @moonpiedumplings@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    44 months ago

    Here’s my main argument for more private services (I try to make all my arguments short).

    According to a study done by proton, a single company makes a minimum of $200 dollars off of each person, each year. Of course, they probably gain more money via clandestine deals or the government buying data directly to get around the 4th amendment.

    But that money, doesn’t go solely to the companies dedicated to collecting data, or those parts of other companies. It goes to lobbying the government to strip away privacy further.

    And then I have two endings, depending on the situation:

    1. Of course, I recognize that in today’s connected world, I can’t get privacy unless I go live in the woods. But I can decrease the amount of money companies make off my data, which I do like.

    2. Organizations like the EFF, lobby on the other side, for more privacy for us. But they are opposed by when massive companies like google also lobby. So when I deny google $100, that’s money they can’t use to lobby anymore. Rather than thinking of it as denying google money, think of it as making a donation to the EFF, that they use to ensure our rights are in place.

  • @cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    24 months ago

    I don’t think there’s much of a point unless person A actually wants to make a change in their habits. It’s like trying to convince someone to switch to Linux.

    • with chickenOP
      link
      fedilink
      04 months ago

      A don’t wanna change mind, A always wanna be right, so I have to have the best arguments, not to make person a to switch, but to “win” the discussion 🙂

  • Rentlar
    link
    fedilink
    34 months ago

    And here I am waiting for Sup to be released by an adrenaline-filled code-junkie from Grand Prairie, Alberta…

  • Matt
    link
    fedilink
    34 months ago

    Signal is the best alternative to Meta messaging apps and to Snapchat for normies.

  • @neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    54 months ago

    I think that this is a pretty good reason.

    If the billionaires are using it for privacy, then it is likely the best one.

    I mean, how much do you wanna bet that they all had a private dinner with the other billionaires that own other apps and had a private conversation about whether their messages are actually private and able to be hid from the government?

    https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-jeff-bezos-encrypted-messaging-auto-delete-ftc-antitrust-2024-5?op=1

  • @UnsavoryMollusk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    14 months ago

    I haven’t check in a while but I think I remember that proprietary app either do not have security audits or they failed them. You should check though I am not 100% sure.

  • @uxellodunum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    24 months ago

    Signal is not the answer. Signal’s backend is essentially closed-source, and to my knowledge none of their binaries are reproducible with the code available. If you really want privacy and security in E2EE, you want somethjng that’s completely open-source (front and backend), and can be self-hosted entirely. Matrix is this.

  • @Gayhitler@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    74 months ago

    For the purposes of the average person the tech guy in your op is absolutely 100% correct.

    All the platforms listed use transport encryption and that’s enough to avoid mitm surveillance which is enough for most people.

    Most people’s “threat model” is the police or a pi. All the apps listed including signal have to comply with orders from American police and have “sidechain attacks” that involve stuff like getting some member of the groupchat’s device and scrolling up or tricking someone into giving up sensitive information.

    • @feannag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 months ago

      Yeah, but when signal complies they give date you made your account and when you last accessed. And that’s it. Probably much less than the others give.