Comment by BlueTemplar
2 years ago
Not completely ? Their server seems to be open source too now (with the exception of the spam filter) ?
2 years ago
Not completely ? Their server seems to be open source too now (with the exception of the spam filter) ?
Can I operate my own Signal server and talk with people on the "main" one?
You're moving the goal post from "self-sovereignty" to supports federation with an infinite number of servers. Nothing is stopping you from compiling your own Signal server and modifying a Signal client to use your server.
Given that Signal is free as a service, supporting federation only increases their expenses.
Without federation, Signal is still working with the advantage of network effects. So an open source server is not enough of a way out.
Element can do it for their Matrix servers. Process.one can do it for ejabberd. Prosody as well. Why can't Signal?
5 replies →
Federation can only make security worse and I do not want it. You can have something else.
Security is extremely important, but it is not the only concern one should have when considering the design of a global communications infrastructure.
I worry a lot more about not having one single actor responsible in dealing for the communication of millions of people than about "quantum-resistant encryption".
3 replies →
Genuine question: Does Tor fall under the definition of federation? Either way, a Tor-like model would have security benefits over a centralized system like Signal, right?
4 replies →