511
Even State Department-funded Human Rights Watch admits that authorities combine legal and illegal methods to obtain convictions: https://text.hrw.org/report/2018/01/09/dark-side/secret-origins-evidence-us-criminal-cases
Combining dragnet surveillance with device hacking is intended in the design of both tools. Hence, State Department-funded Signal dupes you into handing over your identity as part of the population-centric mapping. In custody, your phone will be hacked when it is taken away if it's important.
https://xcancel.com/hannahcrileyy/status/2034273723667161480#m
Sorry but both points are irrelevant, nonprofit foundations can still be forced to turn over user information. That is part of following the law so nothing that would need to be hidden to auditors, unless you were talking about encryption audits which is completely besides the point
What data is there for Signal to turn over? Can you prove that they're keeping messages or logs on their servers that have 'disappeared' from all the associated devices?
Your entire social network graphs, and timestamped message history.
No one can "prove" signal doesn't store everything. If you give me ssh access to their server, then I can verify. Otherwise it's "just trust me bro".
What do you think an independent autit does?
But not the messages, and that's basically all that matters
LOL no is not.
Its the largest part that matters, because if they don't have that, they cannot secretly snoop into everyone's plans (and share that info with ice/dns/etc.)
Relevant xkcd.
If someone is already a suspect of something and they have the social network graphs of them they can cross the information and put others in the watchlist. Enough suspects interacting with each other can lead to a more thorough investigation and extract information by other means, it's not like things like ICE cares for human's right.
the irrededeemable fact that you are using it, which matters because the government now just targets all the signal users. they can't read your messages, so they are applying guilt by association.
The audits determined they don't have any user information to provide. You can see this in previous government requests where the only thing provided was a timestamp of last connection to the network.
and the phone number, which is clearly user information, now being used against the users