I’ve been inspecting this topic quite a lot and I’m a little confused now. So, we have reasons not to use Signal, reasons not to use Matrix, there were also some claims about Session being a fraught. Briar is mostly activists related (not very suitable for daily use), XMPP lacks good clients and suffers from fragmentation of protocol standards implementation, SimpleX is too feature-incomplete (no UnifiedPush support, big battery drain on Android, very decent desktop client without any message sync). I can’t say a lot about Threema or Wire, as I’m not very familiar with them.

So, my question is — is there any good private messenger at all? What do you think is the most acceptable option?

EDIT: In addition to my post:

All messengers have their flaws, I’m well aware of that. I was interested in hearing users’ opinions regarding these shortcomings, not in finding the perfect messenger. I may have worded my thoughts incorrectly, sorry for that.

  • 84skynet@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It really just depends on your threat model.

    Think it in this way: What is the most secure way to walk in the city? You’ll need a team of armed bodyguards and wear a full bulletproof vest. Do you REALLY need this level of security? Who are you protecting from? If the answer is a criminal organization or law enforcement, then yes, probably. But if the answer is a random thief, then you’ll probably need to just carry a gun, pepper spray, knife etc.

    Same goes for privacy online and messenger in this case. Are you an activist or a drug dealer? Then you’ll probably need Tails + something like SimpleX via TOR. Otherwise, if you are just concerned of typical surveillance capitalism (and don’t want the government to scan your chats like it probably will in the EU after Chat Control), in my opinion, Signal is the best compromise of privacy, security and convenience.

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So, we have reasons not to use Signal, reasons not to use Matrix

    yes, nearly all possible things in the world have been argued by someone somewhere already

    • JustMarkov@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      These reasons are serious and valid. That’s why I provided links, so as not to be unsubstantiated.

      • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This whole subject is such a chestnut here. No messaging option is perfect, you will need to compromise. If a perfect option existed you would have heard of it already. And if you haven’t heard of it, then by definition it must be small with few users and even fewer maintainers to keep an eye on its codebase and security, which is risky in itself.

        • JustMarkov@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          All messengers have their flaws, I’m well aware of that. I was interested in hearing users’ opinions regarding these shortcomings, not in finding the perfect messenger. I may have worded my thoughts incorrectly though, sorry for that.

    • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      From what I’ve seen there’s a lot of very bad security advice out there with even tech journalists and such just straight up repeating stuff they don’t understand

  • jherazob@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Snikket is an attempt to solve the XMPP issues, or at least to reduce them, single all-in-one XMPP server distro and clients across platforms, and since it’s self-hosted no one should get their hands on your data (in normal circumstances).

    That said, the saying goes “Perfect is the enemy of Good”. Just because a solution is not perfect doesn’t make it unusable, any of those options you mention full of problems are a helluva better than FB Messenger or plain SMS for example. Depending on your threat model they might be more than enough.

  • Zexks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    There’s no such thing as private on the internet. Sometime after the nineties everyone forgot that.

      • Zexks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Do you need links to police cracking people crypto wallets. That’s about as secure as you’re going to get now and it’s still not enough. So what else have you got.

    • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      There is no such thing as a binary choice between “absolutely private” and “absolutely non-private”.

      • Zexks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re either connected or disconnected. There is no in between. All you can do is toggle between them and hope no one is paying attention.

      • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is not binary like this either. There are a TON of variables.

        • You can have the IPs you communicate with visible to your ISP directly, or hidden from an ISP but visible to a VPN, or hidden from ISP but visible to the Tor network, the safety of which depends on “against whom”.
        • You can have your messages encrypted in transit but visible to the messaging server, or encrypted end-to-end and thus useless to the messaging server too.
        • You can have the identity you post under bound to an identity outright, or you could obfuscate that.
        • You can use a centralized messenger that has your whole communication graph and all metadata, or you can use a federated one with multiple identities and thus metadata scattered across multiple places. Or Briar that doesn’t have servers at all.

        All depends on whom you want to be private against, as well as how much effort they want to put into getting your information. There is no “absolute privacy”… But there is “requiring more effort from the chosen adversary than you’re worth”.

      • Zexks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        No I’m not. Google up police cracking criminal crypto wallets. These kinds of responses are exactly why this question got asked.

  • Im_old@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Simplex.chat

    No identifiers, pfp, FOSS, can route through tor.

    Or host your own matrix or xmpp server.

  • Daklon@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m using simplex without problems. I get all notifications and didn’t notice an increased battery drain.

  • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Depends a lot on who you’re talking to, and your, and their threat models. For many, signal provides pretty good protection, which brings us to a salient point, anything that actually provides good security will attract plenty of negativity, often from state level actors who feel (are) threatened. If you’re playing at that level, adam_y is right, dead drops and one time pads. Presuming lesser threat, signal beats telegram and FB etc. Email is plaintext unless proton to proton, encrypted email is fine (look at PGP) and indeed if you encrypt at home before sending it’s pretty much a dead drop anyway, as long as the other party has a key, and I’m wandering off the beaten path.

    Seems you want a secure messenger that works and are scared by random crap because you don’t have the relevant knowledge to decide (spoiler, very few do, and it’s insider knowledge, the world is imperfect), fair enough, but don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. As long as you’re willing to give up your phone number, Signal is well regarded (exchange privacy for security, you decide). But yeah, no perfects, world imperfect, trust hard, deal ;)

  • Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    For me SimpleX does everything I need. Unified push would be nice, and would address battery usage. I don’t need or want message sync, so that’s not an issue.

    They all have tradeoffs, so it’s just a matter of your priorities. For instance I’m OK with the higher battery drain because it’s not using Google.

  • troed@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t consider those comments regarding Matrix as problematic. Don’t use someone else’s server if you don’t trust them - including a third party lookup server.

    /selfhosting Matrix

    • AlphaAutist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The article he linked specifically mentioned that the data is sent to matrix’s servers even when using a self hosted server though

  • mipadaitu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    That article in Signal is bogus. It is entirely based on speculation from how funding comes in, and also either ignores, or misunderstands how Signal fundamentally works.

    The EFF recommends Signal, and it’s one of the most secure ways to communicate.

    https://ssd.eff.org/module/how-to-use-signal

    You can make your own decisions, but if you just grab any random arguments, you’ll find a reason to doubt everything.

    • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lemmy has some sort of slander campaign going against Signal. Can’t tell if it’s just misinformed idiots or a paid shill smear campaign being run here (likely the former, Lemmy is too small for companies to give a shit about.) It’s really annoying. Same with Mozilla and Firefox. Not sure Lemmy likes anything?

        • Cenotaph@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Signal has usernames (must be enabled) and you can have your phone number hidden from public view & prevent it from being used to search up your acc

          • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            That got added recently, but you still need a phone number to sign up. A phone number is tied to your identity, meaning that signal’s database has the names and addresses of everyone who uses it. And since signal is US-based, its subject to US national security letters, meaning its illegal for signal to tell anyone that the US government has requested information about who they’re talking to.

            Under the Obama administration, an average of 60 NSLs were issued every single day.

          • toastal@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Let me message you without having an Android or iOS primary device then. Can’t do it.

    • s38b35M5@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can make your own decisions, but if you just grab any random arguments, you’ll find a reason to doubt everything.

      Agreed. Especially if your source is Dessalines. 🙄

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The US-state-department funding is important sure, but you also ignored every other point in that article.

  • rcbrk@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    XMPP lacks good clients and suffers from fragmentation of protocol standards implementation

    • For Android: Conversations is excellent, also on F-Droid if you don’t want to use the Google store.
    • For iOS/MacOS: Siskin or iOS/MacOS: Monal.
    • For Linux/Windows: Gajim or Linux: Dino.

    “Protocol fragmentation” is not a valid complaint about XMPP – it’s like complaining that ActivityPub is fragmented; but that’s not a problem: you use the services (Mastodon, Lemmy, Kbin, etc) built with it which suit your needs, mostly interacting with that sector of the federation (eg, Lemmy+Kbin), but get a little interoperability with other sectors as a bonus (eg, Lemmy+Mastodon).