A simple system like that is easy to implement. I don’t think anyone’s questioning that they can build the worst attempt at an anti-spam system, like the one you’re suggesting. The types of spam you see on modern systems needs a bit more thought than “block if reported more than x times in x times” because you could easily target people and disable them remotely by coordinating attacks.
So yeah, it’s not magic if you want a dumb system that may introduce other problems, but you really have to think about things sometimes if you want it to work well in the long run.
I’ve never crashed my car, should everyone get rid of their car’s seat belts?
Your experience does not represent the world. I’ve only experienced 2 cases of spam on Signal, but they were all within the last year. I’ve had zero spam in the many years I’ve now been using Signal. So, while my anecdote is just as invalid as your single point of data, there’s definitely a trend for increased spam as a service gains popularity and it makes sense that they’re looking at enhanced methods to block spammers.
I still don’t see why they want a super secure smart system to block with captcha
You don’t understand why Signal, one of the most secure messaging platforms available, wants a super secure smart system to block spammers? I think you answered your own question.
Telegram for example you can add your own bot to kick the bot users. If you get a direct message you can just block and report
Telegram stores all your data and can view everything you do - unless you opt into their inferior E2EE chat solution known as “Secret Chats” - so it’s easier for them to moderate their services. When you report someone, Telegram moderators see your messages for review [0] and can limit an account’s capabilities. Signal can’t view your messages because everything is E2EE, nobody but the intended recipient can view your messages, they can’t review anything.
As you can see, without even digging into it too much, I’ve already found one case where Signal faces challenges not present in Telegram. Thing’s aren’t always as simple as they seem. Especially not for Signal, as they’ve worked their asses off to ensure they have as little data on their users as possible.
Briar is probably more secure and it’s not the only secure app to chat in this world, Signal isn’t the MOST SECURED one xD.
A communication platform is only as good as it’s feature-set, ease-of-use, and accessibility. I’m not going to ask my grandma to install Briar - hell, half my friends and family with iPhones can’t even install it, there’s no app for it. I would consider my PGP signed/encrypted text files delivered via carrier pigeon even more secure than briar, but who would I even talk to? Maybe Briar will be a great alternative in the future, but it has a lot of ground to cover. Also, Signal is fully E2EE - that’s what I want, that’s what I care about right now. I’m keeping an eye on Briar, but I’m not asking anyone to install it yet.
Just block and done.
You’re simplifying a problem in a domain you seem to have zero experience with. I will just leave it at at that, as my previous examples in my previous reply didn’t seem to click.
if FBI asks for a backdoor you are forced to make it BY LAW and you can’t even tell this to anyone BY LAW
This is a lie.
Forced labor in the US is illegal. The FBI cannot force you or an organization to work without compensation. As such, the FBI cannot compel software developers to work (modify their code to make it less secure) without breaking the law.
The All Writs Act forces companies to assist in investigations by providing data they already have, (which Signal gladly does [1] )but it does not grant the ability to force someone to work (which is what software development is and is what would be required to backdoor their own systems).
A simple system like that is easy to implement. I don’t think anyone’s questioning that they can build the worst attempt at an anti-spam system, like the one you’re suggesting. The types of spam you see on modern systems needs a bit more thought than “block if reported more than x times in x times” because you could easily target people and disable them remotely by coordinating attacks.
So yeah, it’s not magic if you want a dumb system that may introduce other problems, but you really have to think about things sometimes if you want it to work well in the long run.
deleted by creator
I’ve never crashed my car, should everyone get rid of their car’s seat belts?
Your experience does not represent the world. I’ve only experienced 2 cases of spam on Signal, but they were all within the last year. I’ve had zero spam in the many years I’ve now been using Signal. So, while my anecdote is just as invalid as your single point of data, there’s definitely a trend for increased spam as a service gains popularity and it makes sense that they’re looking at enhanced methods to block spammers.
You don’t understand why Signal, one of the most secure messaging platforms available, wants a super secure smart system to block spammers? I think you answered your own question.
Telegram stores all your data and can view everything you do - unless you opt into their inferior E2EE chat solution known as “Secret Chats” - so it’s easier for them to moderate their services. When you report someone, Telegram moderators see your messages for review [0] and can limit an account’s capabilities. Signal can’t view your messages because everything is E2EE, nobody but the intended recipient can view your messages, they can’t review anything.
As you can see, without even digging into it too much, I’ve already found one case where Signal faces challenges not present in Telegram. Thing’s aren’t always as simple as they seem. Especially not for Signal, as they’ve worked their asses off to ensure they have as little data on their users as possible.
[0] https://www.telegram.org/faq_spam#q-what-happened-to-my-account
deleted by creator
A communication platform is only as good as it’s feature-set, ease-of-use, and accessibility. I’m not going to ask my grandma to install Briar - hell, half my friends and family with iPhones can’t even install it, there’s no app for it. I would consider my PGP signed/encrypted text files delivered via carrier pigeon even more secure than briar, but who would I even talk to? Maybe Briar will be a great alternative in the future, but it has a lot of ground to cover. Also, Signal is fully E2EE - that’s what I want, that’s what I care about right now. I’m keeping an eye on Briar, but I’m not asking anyone to install it yet.
You’re simplifying a problem in a domain you seem to have zero experience with. I will just leave it at at that, as my previous examples in my previous reply didn’t seem to click.
This is a lie.
Forced labor in the US is illegal. The FBI cannot force you or an organization to work without compensation. As such, the FBI cannot compel software developers to work (modify their code to make it less secure) without breaking the law.
The All Writs Act forces companies to assist in investigations by providing data they already have, (which Signal gladly does [1] )but it does not grant the ability to force someone to work (which is what software development is and is what would be required to backdoor their own systems).
[0] https://www.beencrypted.com/news/apple-vs-fbi-events-summary/
[1] Reminder that Signal only collects: 1) the date you signed up 2) the last day your client pinged their servers.
deleted by creator