Conversation

Replying to

It was inaccurately claimed that the ability to do local backups is going away. That couldn't be further from the truth. I responded to that at twitter.com/DanielMicay/st. Again no response, but they continue to make these kinds of false claims despite it clearly not being accurate.

Quote Tweet

Replying to @moxie @RichFelker and 2 others

Backing up locally via SAF works fine. No need for the deprecated Storage permission. The app can request persistent access to a directory for backups and the user just chooses the backup directory via SAF and the app. Can't something similar be done on iOS via their equivalent?

2

2

10

I replied to

at twitter.com/DanielMicay/st noting the PIN existed before as a useful registration lock feature and the importance of securing the app for how most people use it, not just power users. It encourages a weak PIN for sync.

blocked me for that tweet.

Quote Tweet

Replying to @chrisrohlf @signalapp and @moxie

Hopefully as a toggle so that it's still possible to have a registration lock PIN without contact syncing, as it was before this was introduced. Most people are going to use the defaults so that's what really matters, and a user-generated PIN + SGX is not a secure approach.

1

2

11

Again, Signal already has an encrypted backup / restore mechanism (at least on Android) with a strong key generated by the app. This sync feature is only secure if users realize they can and should set a strong passphrase and do it. The app encourages a weak PIN + they make it...

2

1

9

... seem like that's fine based on using SGX when it's an extremely problematic approach that's ultimately unworkable. The reliance on SGX is at serious odds with past design choices: end-to-end encryption, encrypted backup / restore with a strong key, etc. Also again, my main...

1

2

8

... issue is not these recent design decisions but rather how they've handled the response to it including valid criticism. Repeatedly making false claims, misrepresenting criticism/suggestions and responding with a holier-than-thou attitude, platitudes and fallacies. Bad look.

1

2

12

It's possible to set a strong passphrase as this PIN and avoid depending on SGX security. The issue is how they've converted an existing feature, the lack of a proper explanation for users, their dismissive response to valid criticisms about it and inaccurate/misleading claims.

1

1

11

The experience of the registration lock PIN being converted to this resembles dark patterns used by Facebook. It wasn't clear even to highly technical people what was happening and what the new PIN they were creating was doing. It is STILL a problem with them adding an opt-out.

1

2

10

They did such a good job designing features like link previews and profiles in a privacy-preserving way. Don't understand how they go from that to this. Bonus of a response resembling a cover-up hand waving away the criticism + blocking people with legitimate questions/concerns.

1

3

12

A weak PIN was fine for the registration lock feature, but it doesn't work well as a way of deriving a meaningful encryption key. Adding a way to opt-out doesn't change that they encourage doing this and it looks like you won't be able to just set a registration lock like before.

2

1

11

Leonardo Porpora

Replying to

Why don't you try to email to security@signal.org?

1

Replying to

It's flawed by design. If the UX generated a strong passphrase (seed phrase) and gave you it to deal with that would be fine, and they wouldn't have a use for SGX since it would be strong encryption. Perhaps just share the existing backup key which is already designed that way...

1:59 PM · Jul 10, 2020Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

It's not a security bug. They intend it to be this way. I don't see a reason to contact them. It's clear from being blocked by

for this tweet twitter.com/DanielMicay/st that my carefully considered thoughts on it aren't welcome. I'm not going to contact them about anything.

Quote Tweet

Replying to @chrisrohlf @signalapp and @moxie

Hopefully as a toggle so that it's still possible to have a registration lock PIN without contact syncing, as it was before this was introduced. Most people are going to use the defaults so that's what really matters, and a user-generated PIN + SGX is not a secure approach.

1

1

Replying to

and

I didn't even add

to that tweet. I was replying to

and just didn't remove what Twitter had added based on who had been previously mentioned. It wasn't supposed to be a message to them.

1

1

Show replies