Not sure, I've never used session but I think less tech savvy people would want to use signal because it is similar to Whatsapp, which they are used to.
It may be fine, but what does it bring that Signal/Briar/Matrix/XMPP+Omemo doesn't have? Does it use existing standard protocol or encryption that's compatible with other messengers, to avoid fragmentation?
It's good that people are working on privacy-preserving tools. But I wish they'd coordinate to avoid fragmentation. Work on common/standard messenging protocols, so that people can talk to each other even using different software.
Currently it feels like going back to the 1990s-2000s, with ICQ/AIM/MSNM being all incompatible, and every single one being unable to communicate with a large fraction of your contacts.
Wasn’t this the blog who also got a response from session asking for a PoC and then they replied with (paraphrasing) “well it’s not my job to provide one”?
So everything in that blog post is theoretical at best?
The real alternative to Signal for myself is SimpleX.
The project is still in his beginning but it's the best instant messaging we could have once polished finished
History isn't stored on the server so it can't be automatically populated on a new device. That is a feature. The alternative, storing the messages on the server or having the means for one device to clone all of its messages to another device, would be insecure.
A 30 character long password is required in order to have enough bits of entropy so that the backed up messages are actually secure.
Grandma isn't moving her data to a new PC without assistance, the person that is assisting her should be competent enough to operate Signal.
As a centralized system, nothing has been shown to improve on Signal yet. For decentralized systems, I haven’t seen anything better than Matrix yet? SimpleX is slightly more secure, but harder to spin up and easier to break.
Session… there have been multiple articles written on how it is flawed and untrustworthy.
"Harder to spin up"? Hard disagree. Matrix's main server implementation is very resource-heavy, and alternatives like Conduit are not full-featured (and broke in some ways for me when interacting with mateix dot org). Meanwhile Simplex servers are pretty light and aside from a couple errors in the documentation that took a while to figure out, it has been easier than Conduit. And unlike Matrix, it has never broken for me so far.
Matrix is not decentralized but rather federated and distributed. Also synapse (matrix sevrer) have poor performance, especially when you federate your instance to others.
My synapse used to run on a 5€/mo VPS besides other stuff and ran fine and now runs on one of my on-premise servers (and not even my fastest, just some old ryzen 2700) with A BUNCH of other stuff besides it. Multiple users, a bunch of large federated rooms, bridges to other messengers ... And it just runs fine with 0 issues.
Are you talking about running a synapse server for like a thousand people or on absolute potato hardware or what is the issue ?
Briar doesn't make sense to me because you're trading a central server for a central service... If tor is down, you can't message. It's the same POF as cellular, which is insane to me.
But it's a difficult concept for the average person to not have an account, but everything is device oriented. Same problem with people not using gpg for email. Having to maintain a thing similar to a private key that's not memorizable like a username and password and back that up in case your device is lost. Is a big hurdle for many. And then additionally having to share a qr code or link through some external means for someone to connect with you rather than just telling them to download an app and enter your username HSS always been difficult.
So, IMHO, Signal has the best implementation possible with the level of usability that many nontechnical people expect in a chat application, even if it's not the most secure. I am interested to see how SimpleX solves these issues in the future, though.
Of course it is, that's the innovating part of it ! My opinion was that I rather use SimpleX if I wanted to switch away from Signal, if not I'll simply use Signal not Session. But my threat model isn't everyone's.
I think as people will be more educated on cryptography in there digital lives we will have better UX to the point of it not be as difficult as sending on e-mail in the late 80s. Innovation like Bitcoin, nostr, U2F, passkeys etc... will be more accessible over time. Today sending a message on Signal is infinity more easy, secure and private than the majority of e-mails of the 21th century.
Grr! Ok, but damned if I could get that to work! It seems like you can't use the desktop and mobile client at the same time! You have to scan a QR code to switch between them! And it has issues with firewalls and VPNs! Old and clueless here, maybe part of the problem. 🙁
Yes SimpleX isn't mature from a UX perspective and that is due to it's innovative approach. If you need to have device sync and don't want Signal, Session could be a better optioon to you.
The main turnoff for me is that it is essentially impossible to selfhost - you use random nodes from the network, and to host such a node, you have to lock up a whole fortune (last time I looked I remember it being around $1500, might've changed) in their own cryptocurrency. They do promise returns, but I am skeptical - where would they take so much money to guarantee compensation for everyone within a sane amount of time? They claim it is against a Sybil attack, but it seems to me that it would be a lot easier for a government/company to have more nodes in a situation when "competition" is reduced like this.
Selfhosting is kind of hard and labor intensive for some of us; had a lot of trouble trying to set up NextCloud on my QNAP (if that counts as selfhosting), and finally gave up.