SimpleX Chat: private and secure messenger without any user IDs (not even random)
simplex.chat
SimpleX Chat - a private and encrypted messenger without any user IDs (not even random ones)! Make a private connection via link / QR code to send messages and make calls.

SimpleX Chat is an instant messenger that is decentralized and doesn’t depend on any unique identifiers such as phone numbers or usernames. Users of SimpleX Chat can scan a QR code or click an invite link to participate in group conversations.

-privacyguides.org

It’s clearly proving to be the most innovative technology when it comes to decentralized communication, in my opinion.

  • GadgeteerZA@fedia.io
    0·
    7 months ago

    @SolarPunker@slrpnk.net I’ve not heard of anyone who does “not like” it? Many don’t know about it maybe. I can’t think of anything I’ve seen against it as it ticks most of the boxes for excellent privacy and has been very usable for me.

    • Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works
      0·
      7 months ago

      Me, my friends, and family are using it

      Aaand… Everyone is hating it, tbh 🤣

      The notifications are unreliable and at the same time it drains 20% of the battery

      Waiting for fixes, also want to setup my own relay

  • TCB13@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    Because when you read their website https://simplex.chat/ and they say stuff like “Possibility of MITM > NO” and “Central component or other network-wide attack > No - resilient” they kind lose their credibility.

    Also, “Other apps have user IDs (…) SimpleX does not, not even random numbers.” > there must be an ID at some point. When you invite someone with a QR code or a link that effectively becomes an ID - even if it changes for every invitation. Also servers need to coordinate message delivery, some form of ID is required for that.

    The way the messaging queues work and what the servers see is interesting but I’m yet to dig into that.

      • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        7 months ago

        i don’t know in what world you’re living, but in this world where people think you’re a pain in the ass for refusing to install WhatsApp when everyone is using it for official communication (work + organizations); Signal is great.

        • jack@monero.town
          0·
          7 months ago

          What are you talking about? Your comment isn’t relevant at all. Next time read more carefully

          • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
            0·
            7 months ago

            it is relevant.

            requiring phone number and being centralized doesn’t make Signal “not great” in a world where a great majority of people use WhatsApp + read the last comment again but more carefully ;)

            signal is a great alternative to a WhatsApp world. Simplex or Session has no chance with the general public

  • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    SimpleX is great but not ready for prime time.

    I use it as a copy paste buffer on my different devices. I run into issues with sending media sometimes.

    Adding people at a distance is a huge pain in the ass with long codes, that needs a solution before the app can be used by normal people.

  • Matt@lemmy.ml
    0·
    7 months ago

    Never tried it. But I use Element, which is based on the Matrix protocol.

  • lemmyreader@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    Interesting project, but last time I tried it was battery hungry, and having made quite an effort to get some of my contacts on Signal, I don’t see it happen to get them all on SimpleXChat. And Signal Stickers make Signal more attractive for some.

  • Gravitywell@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    7 months ago

    I don’t trust for profit venture capital funding, if you want to see where it ends up just Look at how telegram or wickr transitions from being “open” and free to getting stripped of features only to have them become paid only and the wickr sold off to Amazon and ended all non business support…the business model for making a profit off chat applications is bad for users.

    Also now that signal supports usernames I have no reason to use anything else even for people I wouldn’t want having my real number.

  • uzi@lemmy.ca
    0·
    7 months ago

    In F-Droid, after disabling all anti-features, SimpleX still is listed. Signal never will be due to connecting to GCM or Firebase. Molly is an improvement for Signal but not for untrackable privacy like SimpleX from using a different ID with each individual SimpleX contact.

    • malean@lemmy.world
      0·
      7 months ago

      I hoped Molly leaved the sms feature, that is the only thing I can use as a bait for let my friends switch to signal.

      • uzi@lemmy.ca
        0·
        7 months ago

        No, because SMS code was removed from Signal, I believe Molly would have to fork the code if they try to put it back in.

        • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
          0·
          7 months ago

          Not to mention, SMS was removed because it’s inherently insecure at every level. Keeping it would mean there’d be an insecure side channel into the protocol. While it’s a useful onboarding mechanism, it can also be abused — and was. So eventually it got removed to prefer privacy and security over convenience.

  • ThinkingThings@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    Simple answer to the question so far as I can see: in order to connect with someone, you have to video conference with them and show them a code. So the anonymity is only as anonymous as the video conference you use to do that. All of the benefits it claims are merely an illusion.

    • jack@monero.town
      0·
      7 months ago

      Just send them the code. It’s okay if the channel over which they the receive the code is insecure

    • 7heo@lemmy.ml
      0·
      7 months ago

      https://simplex.chat/blog/20240314-simplex-chat-v5-6-quantum-resistance-signal-double-ratchet-algorithm.html

      messenger-comparison

      ¹ Repudiation in SimpleX Chat will include client-server protocol from v5.7 or v5.8. Currently it is implemented but not enabled yet, as its support requires releasing the relay protocol that breaks backward compatibility.

      ² Post-quantum cryptography is available in beta version, as opt-in only for direct conversations. See below how it will be rolled-out further.

      Some columns are marked with a yellow checkmark:

      • when messages are padded, but not to a fixed size.
      • when repudiation does not include client-server connection. In case of Cwtch it appears that the presence of cryptographic signatures compromises repudiation (deniability), but it needs to be clarified.
      • when 2-factor key exchange is optional (via security code verification).
      • when post-quantum cryptography is only added to the initial key agreement and does not protect break-in recovery.
  • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    “Hang on let me write down my QR code”

    Usernames exist for a reason, especially in chat apps. Not having usernames is only going to severely limit your target demographic. And if nobody uses your app does it’s benefits even matter?

      • 56!@lemmy.ml
        0·
        7 months ago

        It can be pretty complicated without a phone. Especially if your computer doesn’t have a webcam.

      • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
        0·
        7 months ago

        You match with someone on a dating app and want to move to the next step… Sending them a QR code to scan into the app is a huge hurdle.

          • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
            0·
            7 months ago

            A Messaging app is made for communication. The ideal dream is a messaging app that is both easy to communicate with, and respect privacy. If a messaging app cannot be used for a common messaging use case, like dating. It’s not going to work as a general messaging app

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    0·
    7 months ago

    SimpleX Chat Ltd is a seed stage startup with a lot of user growth in 2022-2023, and a lot of exciting technical and product problems to solve to grow faster.

    Run by a VC funded for-profit company. That really should tell you all you need to know. Sorry, but no thanks.

    • FarraigePlaisteach@kbin.social
      0·
      7 months ago

      Upvoted bc VC eventually means enshittifiication. But with xz getting back-doored recently, what is the middle ground that keeps these things sustainable financially and operationally?

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        0·
        7 months ago

        Maybe it’ll be governments partially funding it. If Schleswig-Holstein’s attempt is anything to go by, it might be a way

          • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
            0·
            7 months ago

            You have 4 basic options for funding:

            -you rely on individual donations which doesn’t bring in enough money

            -you force people to pay for it, which makes it less attractive when compared to traditional software, and makes much of the community pissy

            -you rely on corporate money

            -you rely on government money

            None is perfect, but some amount of government funding (let’s say, 10% of what they would pay Microsoft for the equivalent software) might make sense

          • taladar@sh.itjust.works
            0·
            7 months ago

            As opposed to whom? Are investors in VC startups less compromised or more? What are the incentives in either case? Who do you trust to be competent and/or incompetent enough to compromise it without you noticing it? Who is likely to change a project that was well intentioned first after the fact? In what ways?

    • Scolding0513@sh.itjust.works
      0·
      7 months ago

      this is a wrong take for a few reasons, if we’re talking about trust.

      Also, Signal literally was taking money from the CIA for a decade and also is based in the US anyway, and no one hardly said a word 🤣🤣 “Privacy” activists are a joke lmao. Also signal made a crypto coin and took away features like SMS, but of course they get a free pass for that too. Makes you wonder.

      1. SimpleX is fully open source, verifiable, and audited. If there are changes that are bad, the community will talk about them, and at worst it can be forked

      2. SimpleX has made it clear that they dont want you to trust them. It’s decentralised and anyone can run their own relay, and the servers are designed prevent correlation. They also make it very easy to use TOR and multiple circuits. This is contrary to the inferior Signal model where you just have to trust that the centralized Signal org isnt leaking your phone and IP to the feds.

      moving towards a decentralised, open, and trustless world is better for everyone. In this kind of system, I really dont give a damn where they are getting their money from, as long as they arent putting crap in the software, and if they do, we will all know about it. But so far they have shown that they are committed to extreme security and privacy, and they obviously arent trying to appeal to normies, so i doubt they would ever even try to put VC-pushed garbage in.

      If you want a good app, you will need funding from somewhere. Look at apps like Session that arent funded well. They suck. So I’d rather SimpleX be funded by a VC instead of by the feds like Signal, as long as everything stays open, free, trustless, and decentralised

      Time to get downvoted! See you guys at -50 😁

      • SolarPunker@slrpnk.netOP
        0·
        7 months ago

        Exactly what I thought; if the technology is so decentralized does it make sense to care so much about who finances the project? Like if one instance of lemmy was funded by Microsoft, we could easily use another one and block it, right?

      • uzi@lemmy.ca
        0·
        7 months ago

        I’m in full agreement with you. Not even a little bit of disagreement.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        0·
        7 months ago

        Where did I even mention Signal? Total strawman argument, as I don’t think Signal is a good option either.

        But you go ahead and trust Simplex Chat Ltd. I guess some people only learn from their own mistakes 🤷‍♂️

        • Scolding0513@sh.itjust.works
          0·
          7 months ago

          you completely ignored what i said, as I specifically argued that simplex is made to be used without trust. so dont talk about me trusting people lol.

          Also I agree with you on Signal, was just throwing it out there for others, not necessarily for you.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            0·
            7 months ago

            You walked right into my deliberate rethorical trap 😅

            There is no such thing as trustless computing, and anyone that tries to sell you that is scamming you or drank the same kool-aid.

  • considine@lemmy.ml
    0·
    7 months ago

    Running out of names for apps? I’ll just borrow from Herpes Simplex… seems catchy.

  • krash@lemmy.ml
    0·
    7 months ago

    If I want a simple chat protocol, I use IRC or XMPP. These are battle proven by time. If I want a really secure protocol, I use Signal or Matrix. These are endored by many security experts who their shit when they assess protocols, crypto and solutions.

    SimpleX may be a good alternative for anonymous communication, but there is plenty options out there. Considering how many startups are funded by cheap VC money, and the business model is always “provide something awesome, and once you have enough traction - enshittify it” makes me very weary of investing myself in new solutions no matter how open-source the are.

    I may sound bitter and skeptic, but I’ve seen this pattern has been repeated many times over.