World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
This seems a bit too nitpicky tbh.
The author is correct, Signal is not "perfect", because the weakest link is always the endpoint device and the end user. Which is kind of the whole point of this article; The issue is not that Signal was used, as it's reasonably secure, it's that the people using it are not secure at all.
Oh, I'm definitely picking nits. I agree and said as much in my last comment. But the way the article presented it made it feel like there is a clear and present danger from Chinese and Russian threat actors against the protocol.
Right, those shouldn't be conflated (the protocols vs the phone/persons security properties).I think anyone actively targeted by a major govt power is probably fucked though. Pegasus has taught us that, so while signal is probably a pretty secure protocol, phones definitely have a lot of vulnerabilities.
Indeed. So are digital hygiene practices.
OK, my time to pick nits: There is a clear and present threat. China, Russia and certainly the US as well have teams of cryptographers looking at software such as Signal and analysing every update and change made in order to spot potential openings. The threat towards Signal however is comparatively small because there are tens if not hundreds of times as many people checking the code as well and reporting back to Signal because of its Open-source nature.
That's exactly my point. I work in security, specifically versus threat actors. I don't typically deal with State actors, but on occasion I do. Those are the real problem.
You're writing the concerns, suggestions, and warnings I would give.
As far as I'm aware the encryption can't really be broken given the current amount of compute. Is anyone aware of what potential vulnerabilities there could be to the Signal protocol outside of brute forcing? How hard is it to crack a private public key exchange?
One of the biggest issues is they can be recorded and potentially decrypted in the future once quantum computing attacks become feasible. At the moment, the cryptography in Signal (or similar) has no known vulnerabilities that would make it vulnerable to practical attacks given reasonable assumptions about the technology that exists in the world at the moment.
And this is very much not limited just to signal. No matter what software, protocol or any other way you use to communicate, both you and the receiving entity/entities are the weakest link by a long shot. I don't expect even my closest friends to hold our everyday conversations secret if for whatever reason their wellbeing was threated in any way. And even if I did there's always other options, like targeted social engineering, to get trough pretty much any reasonable safety concerns on digital communication.
Of course in everyday life if our chat histories were publicly available it would not be too big of an issue, but it's still something worth keeping on mind when interacting over any digital or any other written medium.