Yes, you can use Signal without sharing your personal phone number. Here’s how I did it.

  • refalo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    tl;dr the sms verification falls back to voice and they just used a payphone.

    I guess if you count the airport full of cameras they went to to do this as “anonymous”, then sure :)

    Also this article from 2017 suggests not using this method:

    It’s important to maintain control of this phone number. For example, you could use a disposable SMS service to register with Signal — there are many such services if you search for them — but those phone numbers can be used by anyone. Similarly, you should avoid using a public payphone’s number, or a SIM card on which you do not intend to renew service. If someone else can receive SMS messages or phone calls to this phone number, they can take your Signal account away from you.

  • ambitiousslab
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    How I Got a Truly Anonymous XMPP Account:

    • Open my client (e.g. Conversations, Monal, Dino)
    • Pick a random server, username and password
    • Click register

    Sorry, it’s a cheap joke, but it still baffles me that Signal requires a phone number, so I felt I had to post it :)

    Of course, this is not XMPP-specific either, just my protocol of choice, there are many other open alternatives that also offer such functionality.

    • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      and then you can anonymously chat with yourself because no one else will bother installing that favorite app of yours!

      I’ve been trying to get people off WhatsApp for who knows how many years now. With Signal, i have a chance of convincing people. When you start talking about matrix or session or SimpleX or ???, people stay on WhatsApp

      • ambitiousslab
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        Different strokes for different folks! I’ve been fortunate enough that many of my family and friends have been happy enough to follow me.

        But I don’t disagree with you, Signal has a much more recognisable brand and better user experience. These are things that we need to improve if we’re going to get anywhere near the level of adoption Signal has.

    • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s there for a reason. You can’t easily create a spam waves if you need a phone number to create an account. And they added usernames now, so you don’t need to share your phone number with people you want to talk to. It’s just there to create an account and can be hidden after that.

      There is Session, that uses UUIDs for names with no phone number requirement, which is basically a fork of Signal with decentralized Loki on top of it.

      • sqgl@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Isn’t spoofing a phone number easy for scammers? If so, I don’t understand why there is (admittedly) so little spam on Signal.

        Does Signal require 2FA upon registration? (I cannot recall)

        • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Spoofing just changes the displayed called/sender ID, not the actual number. They would still need real numbers for each account. And they block a lot of VoIP numbers, like most services these days. And getting carrier SIMs or e-SIMs is a not that easy.

          No mandatory 2FA as far as I know.

          • sqgl@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            No mandatory 2FA as far as I know.

            Then how is the authenticity of a number tested by Signal?

    • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      And - gasp! - you can do it from your computer directly! No Android emulators, no inconvenient command-line client!

  • TheBigBrother@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    What about buying the cheapest SIM card in a convenience store and activate the service with it using a dumb phone?

    • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      That might work in most places, but there are countries that only sell pre-paid cards with ID registration.

      • delirious_owl@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Protip: in those countries, go to the tourist hot spots and walk into a SIM selling shop. Use a thick foreign accent.

        There’s always an industry for anon SIM cards for tourists.

        • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That won’t work in Australia. You can buy the SIM anywhere of course, you just can’t activate it. You’ll need proof of ID on line to do that… There are only three operators (the rest are resellers). I am sure there are ways around it but not the one you suggest.

          When I was last in NZ you didn’t need ID must buy a SIM and good to go, not sjre thats still the case though?

    • Cobrachicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Usually those numbers fall back into the provider’s pool after a time of not regular usage and get sold again, at least here in Europe.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        The twist they’ve introduced in this article is they’re using the registration lock feature, which means you have a signal pin enabled, so as long as the account doesn’t go idle for 7 days even somebody who gets the phone number can’t use signal.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            The fundamental problem is the signal foundation sees the phone number as the identity. If you don’t have control of the phone number, you don’t really have control of the identity.

            The good news is, they let you change your phone number and maintain your contacts. But if the phone number the account is currently registered to get assigned to somebody else and you don’t change it, then you’re playing the 7-day roulette

    • mipadaitu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s fine for a temporary signal account, but if you let the number expire, then someone else gets assigned that number, and that new person wants to use Signal, they’ll get your account.

      They can’t see your old messages, but they’ll get any new ones instead of you.

    • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I think anonymity is heavily coupled with privacy, if someone knows my account is linked to my phone number, that’s a very strong form of fingerprinting. Even if E2E encryption is perfect, it takes one bad actor on the the reciever end of my message to both identify who I am through my phone number and leak my message. If just my message is leaked and there’s no fingerprint leading to me, I am still safe. Real example: It took Proton leaking the IP address of a climate activist to the state to get them arrested, not a hole in their E2E mail encryption. A phone number is potentially an even stronger identifier.

    • DessalinesA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      If I asked 10 people to give me their home address, they’re not going to care whether someone defines that as privacy or anonymity. But signal’s reliance on phone number’s (which are easily linked to your identity and home address in most countries) as the primary identifier means giving away just that.

      Why do people feel the need to split hairs with these terms?

      • Manmoth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why do people feel the need to split hairs with these terms?

        He’s not splitting hairs. It’s just a different value proposition. I don’t like the phone number requirement either but it makes sense to your average normie who realizes SMS is exposed plaintext. Something like an anonymous seed phrase as the key to your account would confuse most people. Email would be an improvement but it’s at best pseudonymous.

  • communism
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Why not just pay for a sim card in cash? Even if your phone number gets exposed it shouldn’t be tied to your identity

    • Shamot@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      In some countries, you need an ID to buy a sim card, so it’s linked to your identity, even if you pay cash.

  • devraza
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wouldn’t just using a temporary phone number service work? From what I remember, you just need to recieve a text message and put it into Signal during registration. From skimming through the post, there’s no mention of this option.

  • Dymonika@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    And sometimes they don’t work at all (that was my experience when I tried using a Google Voice number to sign up for Signal).

    I’ve been using a GV number with no problem all this time. 🤷🏻‍♂🤨