Tag Archives: signal

Signal Will Leave the UK Rather Than Add a Backdoor

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2023/09/signal-will-leave-the-uk-rather-than-add-a-backdoor.html

Totally expected, but still good to hear:

Onstage at TechCrunch Disrupt 2023, Meredith Whittaker, the president of the Signal Foundation, which maintains the nonprofit Signal messaging app, reaffirmed that Signal would leave the U.K. if the country’s recently passed Online Safety Bill forced Signal to build “backdoors” into its end-to-end encryption.

“We would leave the U.K. or any jurisdiction if it came down to the choice between backdooring our encryption and betraying the people who count on us for privacy, or leaving,” Whittaker said. “And that’s never not true.”

Fake Signal and Telegram Apps in the Google Play Store

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2023/09/fake-signal-and-telegram-apps-in-the-google-play-store.html

Google removed fake Signal and Telegram apps from its Play store.

An app with the name Signal Plus Messenger was available on Play for nine months and had been downloaded from Play roughly 100 times before Google took it down last April after being tipped off by security firm ESET. It was also available in the Samsung app store and on signalplus[.]org, a dedicated website mimicking the official Signal.org. An app calling itself FlyGram, meanwhile, was created by the same threat actor and was available through the same three channels. Google removed it from Play in 2021. Both apps remain available in the Samsung store.

Both apps were built on open source code available from Signal and Telegram. Interwoven into that code was an espionage tool tracked as BadBazaar. The Trojan has been linked to a China-aligned hacking group tracked as GREF. BadBazaar has been used previously to target Uyghurs and other Turkic ethnic minorities. The FlyGram malware was also shared in a Uyghur Telegram group, further aligning it to previous targeting by the BadBazaar malware family.

Signal Plus could monitor sent and received messages and contacts if people connected their infected device to their legitimate Signal number, as is normal when someone first installs Signal on their device. Doing so caused the malicious app to send a host of private information to the attacker, including the device IMEI number, phone number, MAC address, operator details, location data, Wi-Fi information, emails for Google accounts, contact list, and a PIN used to transfer texts in the event one was set up by the user.

This kind of thing is really scary.

UK Threatens End-to-End Encryption

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2023/04/uk-threatens-end-to-end-encryption.html

In an open letter, seven secure messaging apps—including Signal and WhatsApp—point out that the UK’s Online Safety Bill could destroy end-to-end encryption:

As currently drafted, the Bill could break end-to-end encryption,opening the door to routine, general and indiscriminate surveillance of personal messages of friends, family members, employees, executives, journalists, human rights activists and even politicians themselves, which would fundamentally undermine everyone’s ability to communicate securely.

The Bill provides no explicit protection for encryption, and if implemented as written, could empower OFCOM to try to force the proactive scanning of private messages on end-to-end encrypted communication services—nullifying the purpose of end-to-end encryption as a result and compromising the privacy of all users.

In short, the Bill poses an unprecedented threat to the privacy, safety and security of every UK citizen and the people with whom they communicate around the world, while emboldening hostile governments who may seek to draft copy-cat laws.

Both Signal and WhatsApp have said that they will cease services in the UK rather than compromise the security of their users worldwide.

Interview with Signal’s New President

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/10/interview-with-signals-new-president.html

Long and interesting interview with Signal’s new president, Meredith Whittaker:

WhatsApp uses the Signal encryption protocol to provide encryption for its messages. That was absolutely a visionary choice that Brian and his team led back in the day ­- and big props to them for doing that. But you can’t just look at that and then stop at message protection. WhatsApp does not protect metadata the way that Signal does. Signal knows nothing about who you are. It doesn’t have your profile information and it has introduced group encryption protections. We don’t know who you are talking to or who is in the membership of a group. It has gone above and beyond to minimize the collection of metadata.

WhatsApp, on the other hand, collects the information about your profile, your profile photo, who is talking to whom, who is a group member. That is powerful metadata. It is particularly powerful—and this is where we have to back out into a structural argument ­ for a company to collect the data that is also owned by Meta/Facebook. Facebook has a huge amount, just unspeakable volumes, of intimate information about billions of people across the globe.

It is not trivial to point out that WhatsApp metadata could easily be joined with Facebook data, and that it could easily reveal extremely intimate information about people. The choice to remove or enhance the encryption protocols is still in the hands of Facebook. We have to look structurally at what that organization is, who actually has control over these decisions, and at some of these details that often do not get discussed when we talk about message encryption overall.

I am a fan of Signal and I use it every day. The one feature I want, which WhatsApp has and Signal does not, is the ability to easily export a chat to a text file.

Signal Phone Numbers Exposed in Twilio Hack

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/08/signal-phone-numbers-exposed-in-twilio-hack.html

Twilio was hacked earlier this month, and the phone numbers of 1,900 Signal users were exposed:

Here’s what our users need to know:

  • All users can rest assured that their message history, contact lists, profile information, whom they’d blocked, and other personal data remain private and secure and were not affected.
  • For about 1,900 users, an attacker could have attempted to re-register their number to another device or learned that their number was registered to Signal. This attack has since been shut down by Twilio. 1,900 users is a very small percentage of Signal’s total users, meaning that most were not affected.

We are notifying these 1,900 users directly, and prompting them to re-register Signal on their devices.

If you were not notified, don’t worry about it. But it does bring up the old question: Why does Signal require a phone number to use? It doesn’t have to be that way.

Cellebrite Can Break Signal

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/12/cellebrite-can-break-signal.html

Cellebrite announced that it can break Signal. (Note that the company has heavily edited its blog post, but the original — with lots of technical details — was saved by the Wayback Machine.)

News article. Slashdot post.

The whole story is puzzling. Cellebrite’s details will make it easier for the Signal developers to patch the vulnerability. So either Cellebrite believes it is so good that it can break whatever Signal does, or the original blog post was a mistake.

EDITED TO ADD (12/22): Signal’s Moxie Marlinspike takes serious issue with Cellebrite’s announcement. I have urged him to write it up, and will link to it when he does.

EDITED TO ADD (12/23): I need to apologize for this post. I finally got the chance to read all of this more carefully, and it seems that all Cellebrite is doing is reading the texts off of a phone they can already access. To this has nothing to do with Signal at all. So: never mind. False alarm. Apologies, again.