• 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah. And I don’t fault them for this route. I just with I could sign up without a phone number. Maybe the username thing is a predecessor to allowing usernam-only registration in the future.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, hopefully. It would also be awesome to have a web login so I could access messages and whatnot when using someone else’s computer w/o having to install something.

      I don’t know what direction they’re going, but I’m honestly okay with the caveats that currently exist.

      • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Having web logon would mean they would need to hold the decryption key in some form (or have a weak decryption key, your credentials), so, while convenient, I think it would degrade security and possibly privacy. Unless you mean to receive new messages, the way the desktop app works?

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Why would they be joking? There’s really not a big difference between how their mobile and desktop apps work and what’s possible in the web. It can fetch the keys from my computer or my phone just like their other apps work, and store the keys and whatnot encrypted in temporary local storage, just like on the phone. WebAssembly could allow them to share the code and retain similar performance.

              I honestly don’t see an issue here. If they need help, I’d be happy to lend a hand.

            • Laborer3652@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Why? C++ does wasm and I’m pretty sure the signal client is already written in C++. It definitely wouldn’t be something that could be pulled off quickly, but the ability to securely run code like this is kind of the whole point of wasm as I understand it, no?

      • Manalith@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’d be more interested in allowing more than one Android device at a time like MySudo. They let you link Windows with a phone so I wouldn’t think it would be too hard to implement.