Translated main part:

At Signal, all communication takes place via various tech giants such as Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Cloudflare. Broken down by domains, the following picture emerges:

Amazon: textsecure-service.whispersystems.org, cdn.signal.org, sfu.voip.signal.org
Google: storage.signal.org, contentproxy.signal.org
Microsoft: api.directory.signal.org, api.backup.signal.org
Cloudflare: cdn2.signal.org

Message exchange (textsecure-service.whispersystems.org) is done via Amazon AWS, for example, while Google Data Servers (storage.signal.org) are responsible for creating and managing the groups. This means that all communication is handled via central servers of the tech giants. Especially privacy-sensitive users may be put off by this, which I can understand. However, at least from an IT security perspective, I think the use of the rented servers is negligible, since Signal works with the zero-knowledge principle. Certainly, it would be desirable if the Signal Foundation hosted the servers itself. However, this would not necessarily mean a security gain. Nevertheless, this is a point of criticism, since this naturally also flushes money into the coffers of the tech data octopuses.

  • @TheAnonymouseJokerOPM
    link
    13 years ago

    IP address might not be a huge concern with dynamic IPs as you can make the case for plausible deniability, plus if content is encrypted, they can have no basis to point out your IP from the millions of IP addresses since there exists no metric to point it out.