[toomuchtodo]

I think that’s uncharitable. Everyone is going through the motions required of them, and this is the public demonstration of those mechanizations (although Signal is a bit cheeky, which is fun). The next step would be government requiring, through legislation, more invasive logging and data collection (Australia and parts of Europe have already seen the beginnings of this discussion) of messaging apps (“we’ve asked for what we can, they said they don’t have it and aren’t required to have it, what do you want us to do?”).

When encryption and secure messaging is outlawed, only outlaws will have and use it.

[the8472]

> When encryption and secure messaging is outlawed, only outlaws will have and use it.

They don't necessarily need to outlaw it. They may just throw up enough hurdles that it doesn't become a major success. Developing a communication system that is secure, featureful and convenient to use for the general population is not a trivial task. A large effort that can be undermined.

E.g. if they only require logging from communication service providers but not from application developers then this would force a decentralized solution. If they lean on payment providers it might get difficult to charge for phone apps or get donations.

The software could continue to legally exist but see little adoption. Which is enough to enable surveillance.

[bink]

Isn't this what happened to Protonmail? They were required by legal order to start logging activity for a specific group of users. It's not outside the realm of possibility that the govt could try to force a company to either start logging Signal metadata or provide a backdoored app to a user. Not that it would necessarily work, but I do expect them to try at some point.

[cassonmars]

This is why messaging apps need to be decentralized and built on top of protocols that cannot be censored or meaningfully monitored.

[toomuchtodo]

With enough effort, anyone can go to jail. America held a taxi driver for 17 years at Guantanamo Bay with no evidence. Tech won’t save you from the state. As always, if your threat model includes a state actor, you are going to have a bad time. For all intents and purposes, their resources are unlimited.

Freedom is won in the courts and the legislature, not in the code (although tech is as useful tool for keeping government implantations in check).

(I still use and donate to Signal, but have a healthy understanding of its limits)

[matheusmoreira]

Yes, but their tyranny must also increase in order to circumvent the technology. They will increasingly resort to actions like you described. Hopefully the population will eventually revolt and put an end to the corrupt government once it becomes unacceptably totalitarian.

Freedom is won through weapons. Encryption is a potent weapon, it can defeat states, militaries. Before computers, it used to be a military tool. It must be democratized, the whole world must use it.

[Nextgrid]

They can put one or two people in jail, but they can't put everyone in jail. If everyone has easy access to end-to-end encrypted messaging and relies on it (for non-nefarious purposes), the government will have a tough time changing that.