please put a link to the source in your post description!

(in this case, it’s https://existentialcomics.com/comic/418 )

deleted by creator

They have to know who the message needs to go to, granted. But they don’t have to know who the message comes from, hence why the sealed sender technique works. The recipient verifies the message via the keys that are exchanged if they have been communicating with that correspondent before or else it is a new message request.

So I don’t see how they can build social graphs if they don’t know who the sender if all messages are, they can only plot recipients which is not enough.

1. You need to identify yourself to receive your messages, and you send and receive messages from the same IP address, and there are typically not many if any other Signal users sharing the same IP address. So, the cryptography of “sealed sender” is just for show - the metadata privacy remains dependent on them keeping their promise not to correlate your receiving identity with the identities of the people you’re sending to. If you assume that they’ll keep that promise, then the sealed sender cryptography provides no benefit; if they don’t keep the promise, sealed sender doesn’t really help. They outsource the keeping of their promises to Amazon, btw (a major intelligence contractor).

2. Just in case sealed sender was actually making it inconvenient for the server to know who is talking to who… Signal silently falls back to “unsealed sender” messages if server returns 401 when trying to send “sealed sender” messages, which the server actually does sometimes. As the current lead dev of Signal-for-Android explains: “Sealed sender is not a guarantee, but rather a best-effort sort of thing” so “I don’t think notifying the user of a unsealed send fallback is necessary”.

Given the above, don’t you think the fact that they’ve actually gone to the trouble of building sealed sender at all, which causes many people to espouse the belief you just did (that their cryptographic design renders them incapable of learning the social graph, not to mention learning which edges in the graph are most active, and when) puts them rather squarely in doth protest too much territory? 🤔

It’s on F-Droid if you load their repo.

It is not allowed in F-Droid’s official repos because it is not open source; anyone can run their own F-Droid repo and distribute proprietary software from it.

Also it’s open source but I understand some people don’t like their license.

It is not open source; that is a term with an internationally recognized definition. Even FUTO themselves now acknowledge it is not.

there is a thread about the moderation of this thread here.

Thanks for editing, but I deleted your comment anyway because it was still just recommending something that is not open source.

fyi there is a thread here discussing the moderation of this thread.

i bet you’re going to love to hate this wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monochrome_painting 😂

because it’s stupid.

you were bamboozled

presumably you find value in some things that some other people think are stupid too; it’s OK

deleted by creator

The good news is that (sometime last year, long after you posted this) futo finally agreed to stop calling their license “open source”; unfortunately there are still some vocal fans of theirs arguing in various forums that it is.

Futo is not open source, as they (now, finally) even admit themselves: https://www.futo.org/about/futo-statement-on-opensource/

See also https://opensource.org/osd and https://opensource.org/authority and compare it to Futo’s licenses; there are (at least) three reasons it doesn’t qualify, can you spot them all? (rhetorical question; don’t @ me)

I am locking this thread to avoid needing to remove misinformation and advocacy from Futo fans who think they should be allowed to redefine a term which there has been consensus about the definition of since before they were born.

even if it’s from its own repository, it is still on F-droid

There is nothing to stop anyone from running their own f-droid repo and distributing non-free software through it, which is what futo is doing.

seems open source enough

This is the definition. Compare it with Futo’s license; it fails to meet both the Open Source Definition and Free Software Definition in several ways. After insisting they could redefine the term for a while (despite the definition’s wide acceptance) and inspiring some of their very vocal fans to promulgate their dishonest argument on their behalf, Futo themselves finally came around and agreed to stop calling their software open source.

you just can’t understand what open-source means

FYI, nearly everyone (including Futo themselves), except for some Futo fans like yourself who haven’t gotten the memo, agrees that this is the definition of “open source” (and Futo’s license obviously does not qualify).

Other comments in this thread suggesting that Futo keyboard is open source have been deleted as offtopic.

usaid.gov is serving a redirect to www.usaid.gov which currently does not resolve.

What is xz attack thingy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XZ_Utils_backdoor

except: pass

“Sorry, I got to return this video”

2004 is when the Blockbuster video rental chain was at its peak (cite), and VHS was still in wide use at the time having only been surpassed by DVD rentals a year earlier. Speed dial was also still a thing then, payphones still exist today, and, although complaints were filed against Bill Cosby much earlier the public wasn’t widely aware of them until 2014.

How about “John Kerry is the candidate who can prevent a second Bush term” ?

weird, i wonder why. i just checked on an ubuntu 24.04 system to confirm it is there (and it is).