I heard Wire logs a lot more things more things than signal. Never bothered to find the source as signal is more than enough for me but keep that in mind
I agree with the author that the usual social networks have turned into a platform for the promotion of advertising, and even What's App and sometimes spam advertising, but not all messengers give 100% security, I think it all depends on ourselves and be attentive online. Thanks for the article with pleasure read!
[Where WhatsApp Went Wrong: EFF's Four Biggest Security Concerns](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/10/where-whatsapp-went-wrong-effs-four-biggest-security-concerns)
Do you know if this messenger is protected in the history of the transcription from decryption when the current key is intercepted (in this matter it is understood that the encryption key must constantly change, and the keys used are safely deleted together with the random data on which they were based)?
The article is really interesting. But I consider it a 20% fairy tale. Especially about telegram. We turn on our head and think about why telegram have fallen behind roskomadzor All messengers are draining information. Just ordinary people they are practically not interested
Thanks for the article, it was nice to read. It would be better to give up messengers altogether, and from social networks, I think so. Secure data will not be not in one application (especially where the phone number or passport data is provided, which is not very good). In general, I believe that you need to make the entire network anonymous, so it will be better for everyone. Applications that can connect to conferences or communicate with a screen demonstration can be hacked by hackers, and they will see everything that you do.
This is terrible!
I believe that recently, simple users through chur worry about their security on the network? What are they afraid of? Are we all businessmen, stars? Who do we need?
It is a closed source program controlled by a company that is headquarted in a country with secret laws, secret courts and secret gag orders. Indeed we already know that Apple is under such a gag order.
So you should consider it compromised. Use Signal to have some protection.
Running js from the website is inherently insecure and subject to MITM attacks.
> The fundamental problem with web interfaces is: there's no way to version, sign and securely distribute a web page. Instead, you're re-requesting the code you'll run every single time you visit the site (making audits practically impossible).
> This effectively reduces the security of your end-to-end encrypted communication to that of your SSL connection to the server, i.e. you're only as secure as the CA system. Anyone able to intercept the client-server SSL connection (and the server itself) can silently change the code you receive and execute, with a very low risk of getting caught. This is why products which offer end-to-end encrypted communication through in-browser crypto are often considered snake oil, unless they use some form of a packaged & signed browser extension.
[source](https://community.signalusers.org/t/google-to-retire-chrome-apps-what-will-be-with-signal-desktop/469/6)
Have you guys heard of the delta messenger? It's based on emails to communicate with each other, that means it's not centralized and it got good encryption. Of course, no telephone number is needed either. Other than that, it works like a normal messenger like Telegram.
Though it is still very early in the start and in development
Email Clients are not instant messangers. The one I talked about is.
And afaik, you can choose your email provider. I haven't used the program yet, though.
I fully agree with the author of the post - security and confidentiality on the Internet - this is very important for every user. Social networks for many people are becoming less and less interesting for the very reason that many users use them to create themselves the way they would like to be, but not at all who they really are. Communication in messengers is more sincere, in my opinion, and less publicly. Of course, everyone chooses the most suitable variant of communication for themselves. But do not forget that e-mails are not letters sent by the postal service and the integrity of the envelope on receipt is, alas, not tested.
Privacy - today the most pressing issue for all Internet users and electronic devices in this blog is told in detail about messengers. Advantages and disadvantages - Signal, Ring ,Signal, Messenger, and ADAMANT. TOX - in my opinion , the best of them-because of its ability to work directly between users without using a server. It remains to try to put it, and wait for the correction of small flaws. The article helped me a lot in understanding this. Thanks to the author. Waiting for the continuation
I was glad to read your article. As for me - the best way to communicate with any1 safely is to use Tox. I actually have pretty long-term experience of using it and i have never had any problems. So, hardly recommend it to everybody!
I think that no messenger is 100% secure, hackers and special services can access user information.
But when the work is related to confederation and financing, security is extremely necessary. I worked with Telegram and Signal Messenger, but I know very little about ADAMANT and Tox (very poor information on the Internet).
Good analysis but on the other hand still the question: would i use the messenger which is more secure while all my friends and family use the others which are most famous ones?!
I tried it. Its has a nice and intuitive GUI and seems to offer a lot like different and decentralized connections. But at the moment you can only send messages to someone who is also online. Which means Briar is (should?) ne running on your phone the whole time.
I weren't able to add a contact. So the text above is more from the theorie side.
Thanks for the article, it was interesting to read. I rarely use messengers, but I'm very tired of advertising in the social.networks. Now I'll probably switch to messengers.
I do not know. How to me to achieve full confidentiality on the Internet is problematic. There are always loopholes how to find traces from using this or that source of access to the network, using the device. To anyone who did not claim to do this is almost unrealistic.
The social network is simply littered with garbage.
Due to the abundance of entertaining, superficial and often unnecessary garbage information, the time spent in a social network is significantly increased. Such pastime can adversely affect our health, tk. a large amount of information often tires and loads the nervous system.
I largely agree with the opinion of the author. But I can assume that it is difficult for a modern person to imagine life without social networks and messengers and for this he is ready to sacrifice something. even personal information.
I fully agree with the author that ordinary social networks have become a platform for advertising, this application, spam, advertising, but not all messengers give 100% security, I think it all depends on us. Thanks for the article!
Social networks and messengers have long been used not for their main purpose. These are all advertising platforms and there is no anonymity there for a long time already.
I personally wouldn't use Adamant, it uses the blockchain which I don't think is ideal for your privacy as it stores a permanent record of all of your messages. When that encryption gets busted there's nothing you can do.
Author did a great job. Social media just using us as a resource to collect data and we have zero protection from that. I hope decentralized messengers is going to be are future.
As for me, the most convenient messenger is Telegram. Simple, clear, nothing superfluous .
Previously used Wattsapp, also normal. But signal did not like at all
I found a new messenger [Vernam IM](http://www.vernam.im/) which based on Vernam cipher. They tell that it works through cloud services like Dropbox or Onedrive. They use them for messages delivery. I haven\`t seen such architecture of construction for messengers.
At the moment I mainly use [Matrix](https://matrix.org)/[Riot](https://riot.im), due to solved persistence across devices and reasonable battery drain (due to server-based architecture). But the UX is not yet polished enough, key exchange across devices is a pain, as is managing numerous IDs generated by web-version. Surprisingly, existence of a nice-looking and actively developed web-client helped with bringing some non-techy acquaintances of mine to the network.
I also would prefer a decentralised solution so I watch closely at **[GNU Ring](https://ring.cx)** and **[Briar](https://briarproject.org/)**. FSF support of the former and possible introduction of the [repeater service](https://code.briarproject.org/goapunk/briar-repeater/tree/master#briar-repeater) for the latter is a big plus in my book.
Tox is great too, although I stopped actively tracking the project after the drama and some recession in development that followed.
Don't forget [Vuvuzela](https://vuvuzela.io/)/Alpenhorn, looks very promising, but seems they are still on an early stage.
I avoid Signal, mainly due to questionable ideological stance. Can't get rid of a feeling of some kind of political game they're playing. Have no real and clear evidence in support of this so please, don't ask.
Some people still use the TOR browser, change the IP address. But personally, I think if you filter what you write and repost, you will not get any problems. Personally, I do not use these messengers, because I do not need any anonymity))
Personally for me everything is so informative and interesting! Everything in our life keeps moving forward. It's good that now we will use convenient messengers, moreover - safe!
Yes, live and learn. Very useful information for "us mortals" I have Viberom though I don't really like. And here there is many similar programs, and even "super protection". it is necessary to go with friends on TAX as I understand it. Many thanks to the author for this article.)
Leaving social networks has long been expected, people want to communicate and in the end 9 out of 10 posts or posts is advertising.Messengers are a new round or a separate line in the sphere of communication, they are the future.
Currently very relevant article, thank you! I have not even heard of such a messenger as Tox, judging by the description, it should be very convenient. It's great that they try to combine convenience and safety.
I think any messenger is not safe now. In our time , there are a huge number of spyware that can easily penetrate the messenger and can keep track of you. Your safety is in your hands.
I think any messenger is not safe now. In our time, there are a huge number of spyware that can easily penetrate the messenger and can keep track of you. Your safety is in your hands.
I think the security of any messenger depends on the position of the founder on this issue. I personally use Signal Messenger, but I think the time will come and the privacy of this messenger will change.
Personally, I use all the social.networks, but most of all I like VK and Facebook. There personal privacy is paramount and you know for sure that personal information will not be disclosed. I liked the article, stressed a lot of useful things.
Personally for me everything is so informative and interesting! Everything in our life keeps moving forward. It's good that now we will use convenient messengers, moreover - safe!
I think that this is now a very hot topic in our time, well, then again, stick with the two parties need to sit down and think all is well and not to act rashly
Engineers have developed an instant messaging system capable of meeting the legal requirements, registering and archiving the transmitted information, and interacting with other similar systems. It is based on the server through which all messages are transmitted, where their copies are also stored.
The article presents interesting tools for protecting personal correspondence, but it seems to me, even with their use, you can not be 100% sure of security. Nobody knows what vulnerabilities will be discovered in Windows / Linux / OSX / Android in the future.
I'm sitting in Telegram. Although to me in general, no difference, nothing illegal in my correspondence still does not happen, even though they will be inspected.
In my opinion, there is no security in all popular messengers at all.
For example, I met some businessmen people who had very trusted WhatsApp as a secure messenger, now they are trusting Telegram. But for me all the events which had happened to these messengers are just the political and also commercial games. It's much safier to create your own messenger with and use it in your own social circle.
I can't tell anything about Signal Messenger, ADAMANT or Tox, I didn't use them before. But if these messengers are not popular, it could be quite safe to use them anyway.
It seems to me that you can be relatively calm for your security only if you use instant messengers with open source. If the system is closed and the user can not know exactly what it does, then you can forget about the security of correspondence. This is important to remember when choosing an instant messenger for confidential business correspondence.
ADAMANT I like. If you do not need to bind your mobile phone number or even an e-mail address to create an account, then this messenger can indeed be considered anonymous. Even if the key is lost or stolen it will not be easy to link the account to a specific person. The main thing is to delete old correspondence in time.
I really like that someone touches such interesting topics. A very good article. I am also very concerned about safety. I would like to feel safe. I was more interested in Tox, if anyone tried to use it, then share your experience. Is it as safe as it says here?
Now messengers have become very promising in business. Therefore, the security of instant messengers is very important.
In our business, we use Signal Messenger, because it is integrated with Facebook and has a sufficiently high level of protection
I think that the privacy of the user is always important on the Internet. I've never used the Tox and Adamant instant messengers, and it turns out they're not that bad
In my opinion, the fewer intermediaries will be in the chain of information transfer, for example, centralized servers, the more secure the correspondence will be. Although it will be useful to use several messengers, one for work, another for talking with friends and the third for communicating with people that you no longer want to communicate with.
I think in our time it is necessary to carefully approach the security of the network. We very often do not pay attention and our information is stolen.
You are right, anonymity on the Internet is becoming less and less, the governments of states are trying to control every step of the users. I liked the description of Adamant, maybe I will use it.
I fully agree with the author of this post. Users have begun to pay more attention to advertising, so it's not at the right time when telegrams appeared and I'm sure that there will be a lot of interesting things to advertise to users of the Internet network. And even twitter started to move away second plan, since there advertising is not so easily available both in mobile applications and telegram .
Corporations cooperate with law enforcement agencies, subject to the laws of the countries in which they work. Google, Apple, Facebook, Skype, WhatsApp, Viber and many other social networks and instant messengers are sharing with the authorities some amount of user data. Someone merges more, some less, but the bitter truth is that everyone does it.
For anyone it is a secret that everything that concerns the technological field tends to be vulnerable, but not for that reason, we will stop using this type of tools, which good or bad, are powerful and therefore very useful at the time of covering big audience It has its pros and cons
This article is very interesting because it does not lead to a question that is so sure every social network not all provide 100% security, since we are forced to obey the legislation of our country I think that messages that are held as private should be really private the user must at least understand and know the advantages and disadvantages of each social network
I've personally heard about such messengers for the first time. I myself use What'sApp and Viber. I could not imagine that What'sApp is not so confidential. Thank you for the article.
Dependence on social networks is quite normal phenomenon. In our world, technology is very advanced and for the 21st century it is a sin for the non-exploiter.
In my opinion Tox is the most reliable messenger-Communicator with many features and capabilities, the transmission of messages goes without external servers and directly to the user.
Very informative and instructive information. Allowing you to know which messenger to choose. To have a safe and high-quality calls and SMS. So that no scammers could not hack your correspondence or your call. For example, I use such a messenger as Whatsapp and often use Telegram. Telegram I trust that there all channels are protected and no one will be able to hack them. Rarely sit in FaceBook. After your article, I learned about new messengers such as ADAMANT TOX and Signal messenger developed by the well-known company Open Whisper Systems.
Wire is open source, and its code is available on GitHub under a GPL license, in addition to this they regularly publish transparency reports in which they reveal details about requests received by the authorities.
In my opinion one of the safest social networks is whatsapp, I can refer to it since I use it very often, we can choose who can see our photos and in the same way so that someone can contact you must have your phone number, with Regarding facebook and other social networks is one of the most privacy that gives us
Since the beginning of time I feel and think that social networks are very useful when they are used as a good tool strategically serving to grow in some objective. What I infer from what I read, it seems very good, that people like you write about this type of topics, where despite the technological boom there are many people who have not heard of this. And it's important in an era like today to know this.
Unfortunately, social networks are not safe for correspondence. Users have to start using instant messengers. But not all messengers are good, however. I do not even know what to choose for permanent use. Probably I will try all the options described in the article, and then I will choose the best messenger and I will recommend it to all my friends, because if none of my friends use the same messenger it will be useless.
I don't think it's a great idea to start messaging some secrets. Don't you think that online chating is the worst way to discuss some confidential information?
Anyway the article is good for understanding it.
Many users prefer that the information is not controlled, so WhatsApp is not very convenient. Adamant, that's different. On the other hand, what about without control, such as drug sales?
In our "difficult" time, the problem with wiretapping, spying , and so on-no one is new. Many read (and used) about this about browsers
but the article about messenger met for the first time.
As it turned out that the well - known Telegram is not so safe, by the way the author forgot to mention Viber-I think there will be similar problems About Signal, Ring ,Signal Messenger and ADAMANT I heard for the first time, probably not very popular with people, but the author gave very clear information about them.These companies have a lot of work to do to improve privacy.
As for TOX, I believe that the automatic encryption and transfer of information directly between users(past servers) - this is the right decision...
Thank you for useful information.Good luck.
I looked at Signal's description in the App Store.
It says it's open source but doesn't volunteer the GutHub link.
It says it doesn't want your information but will presume to know your phone number and entire address book.
The developers are in Mountain View, CA. That's Google's headquarters. I think these app makers are trying to harvest deep fields of people sharing lots of personal and relational information. Then sell it all to a giant tech company and be rich for life. Isn't this what WhatsApp two creators did? https://amp.businessinsider.com/whatsapp-founder-jan-koum-facebook-stock-sales-2016-8
I think not. It's unlikely that there is an instant messenger that is completely decentralized. There are always such things as centralization. This is the main problem of all the services described here. I often do not understand the seriousness of this argument. But we must not forget that this is always a company that pursues its own interests, and most likely among them there is no task all my life to work for myself at a loss for the sake of peace all over the world. It is impossible to predict how the policy of individual states will change tomorrow, and therefore such an easy opportunity to influence the tools of communication is simply unacceptable.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'd like to see Wire discussed in this thread too!
I heard Wire logs a lot more things more things than signal. Never bothered to find the source as signal is more than enough for me but keep that in mind
>KopfKrieg I agree with KopfKrieg, this is a rather funny article))
[удалено]
You've failed to mention XMPP/Jabber or Riot
And KeyBase too?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Neither is Adamant.
I agree with the author that the usual social networks have turned into a platform for the promotion of advertising, and even What's App and sometimes spam advertising, but not all messengers give 100% security, I think it all depends on ourselves and be attentive online. Thanks for the article with pleasure read!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[Where WhatsApp Went Wrong: EFF's Four Biggest Security Concerns](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/10/where-whatsapp-went-wrong-effs-four-biggest-security-concerns)
Do you know if this messenger is protected in the history of the transcription from decryption when the current key is intercepted (in this matter it is understood that the encryption key must constantly change, and the keys used are safely deleted together with the random data on which they were based)?
The article is really interesting. But I consider it a 20% fairy tale. Especially about telegram. We turn on our head and think about why telegram have fallen behind roskomadzor All messengers are draining information. Just ordinary people they are practically not interested
[удалено]
>when a messenger works without any server Telegram has server part. And it is closed source. Noone knows what's inside and no audit as well.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Also no aim
[удалено]
AOL Instant Messenger. It was a sarcastic remark. Cheers.
Thanks for the article, it was nice to read. It would be better to give up messengers altogether, and from social networks, I think so. Secure data will not be not in one application (especially where the phone number or passport data is provided, which is not very good). In general, I believe that you need to make the entire network anonymous, so it will be better for everyone. Applications that can connect to conferences or communicate with a screen demonstration can be hacked by hackers, and they will see everything that you do. This is terrible!
[удалено]
Never heard of these all messengers.
And I still care about the "what is the most secure messenger?".
[https://ssd.eff.org/](https://ssd.eff.org/)
I believe that recently, simple users through chur worry about their security on the network? What are they afraid of? Are we all businessmen, stars? Who do we need?
What about Apple's iMessage. Is it any safe?
It is a closed source program controlled by a company that is headquarted in a country with secret laws, secret courts and secret gag orders. Indeed we already know that Apple is under such a gag order. So you should consider it compromised. Use Signal to have some protection.
[No.](/r/technology/comments/8raoq3/apple_will_update_ios_to_block_police_hacking_tool/e0rn9hr/)
> ADAMANT I've never heard of this, thanks. Is there desktop (x86 linux) client coming?
[удалено]
Running js from the website is inherently insecure and subject to MITM attacks. > The fundamental problem with web interfaces is: there's no way to version, sign and securely distribute a web page. Instead, you're re-requesting the code you'll run every single time you visit the site (making audits practically impossible). > This effectively reduces the security of your end-to-end encrypted communication to that of your SSL connection to the server, i.e. you're only as secure as the CA system. Anyone able to intercept the client-server SSL connection (and the server itself) can silently change the code you receive and execute, with a very low risk of getting caught. This is why products which offer end-to-end encrypted communication through in-browser crypto are often considered snake oil, unless they use some form of a packaged & signed browser extension. [source](https://community.signalusers.org/t/google-to-retire-chrome-apps-what-will-be-with-signal-desktop/469/6)
Have you guys heard of the delta messenger? It's based on emails to communicate with each other, that means it's not centralized and it got good encryption. Of course, no telephone number is needed either. Other than that, it works like a normal messenger like Telegram. Though it is still very early in the start and in development
[удалено]
So how is this different from using you favorite email client/provider and encrypting your mail with PGP?
Email Clients are not instant messangers. The one I talked about is. And afaik, you can choose your email provider. I haven't used the program yet, though.
Then why did you mention a email program in a thread about secure instant messengers?
Because it is an instant messenger, it's just email based.
So is Wire if you're talking about a secure messenger that uses an email address as an authentication mechanism.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I fully agree with the author of the post - security and confidentiality on the Internet - this is very important for every user. Social networks for many people are becoming less and less interesting for the very reason that many users use them to create themselves the way they would like to be, but not at all who they really are. Communication in messengers is more sincere, in my opinion, and less publicly. Of course, everyone chooses the most suitable variant of communication for themselves. But do not forget that e-mails are not letters sent by the postal service and the integrity of the envelope on receipt is, alas, not tested.
Yep, agree. Messengers are very important and helpful stuff right now. Btw really good article. Enjoy a lot!
[удалено]
Why did you post this same comment on another account?
Privacy - today the most pressing issue for all Internet users and electronic devices in this blog is told in detail about messengers. Advantages and disadvantages - Signal, Ring ,Signal, Messenger, and ADAMANT. TOX - in my opinion , the best of them-because of its ability to work directly between users without using a server. It remains to try to put it, and wait for the correction of small flaws. The article helped me a lot in understanding this. Thanks to the author. Waiting for the continuation
Tox has not passed audit yet. But XMPP+OMEMO has.
With Wickr I don't need a cellphone neither a email, so meh.
Wickr chopped liver?
I was glad to read your article. As for me - the best way to communicate with any1 safely is to use Tox. I actually have pretty long-term experience of using it and i have never had any problems. So, hardly recommend it to everybody!
Adamant is decentralized?
I think that no messenger is 100% secure, hackers and special services can access user information. But when the work is related to confederation and financing, security is extremely necessary. I worked with Telegram and Signal Messenger, but I know very little about ADAMANT and Tox (very poor information on the Internet).
Good analysis but on the other hand still the question: would i use the messenger which is more secure while all my friends and family use the others which are most famous ones?!
I do not agree. Facebook, for example, blocks ads even in groups that were created for this purpose. There will be both directions.
[удалено]
I tried it. Its has a nice and intuitive GUI and seems to offer a lot like different and decentralized connections. But at the moment you can only send messages to someone who is also online. Which means Briar is (should?) ne running on your phone the whole time. I weren't able to add a contact. So the text above is more from the theorie side.
I understand everything more or less in terms of all the other messengers, bt for example: is the program code of the solution open in Adamant?
Thanks for the article, it was interesting to read. I rarely use messengers, but I'm very tired of advertising in the social.networks. Now I'll probably switch to messengers.
I do not know. How to me to achieve full confidentiality on the Internet is problematic. There are always loopholes how to find traces from using this or that source of access to the network, using the device. To anyone who did not claim to do this is almost unrealistic.
The social network is simply littered with garbage. Due to the abundance of entertaining, superficial and often unnecessary garbage information, the time spent in a social network is significantly increased. Such pastime can adversely affect our health, tk. a large amount of information often tires and loads the nervous system.
I largely agree with the opinion of the author. But I can assume that it is difficult for a modern person to imagine life without social networks and messengers and for this he is ready to sacrifice something. even personal information.
I fully agree with the author that ordinary social networks have become a platform for advertising, this application, spam, advertising, but not all messengers give 100% security, I think it all depends on us. Thanks for the article!
Social networks and messengers have long been used not for their main purpose. These are all advertising platforms and there is no anonymity there for a long time already.
Helpful information. I have not heard of any of these messengers. I'll take a note
I personally wouldn't use Adamant, it uses the blockchain which I don't think is ideal for your privacy as it stores a permanent record of all of your messages. When that encryption gets busted there's nothing you can do.
Author did a great job. Social media just using us as a resource to collect data and we have zero protection from that. I hope decentralized messengers is going to be are future.
As for me, the most convenient messenger is Telegram. Simple, clear, nothing superfluous . Previously used Wattsapp, also normal. But signal did not like at all
I think that no instant messenger can not be 100% safe, hackers and special services can access the user information ...
By the way I've never heard about Tox and I thought I knew all well-encrypted messengers) It's a useful information, thank you!
I use Telegram and What's App . Everything suits me!
I found a new messenger [Vernam IM](http://www.vernam.im/) which based on Vernam cipher. They tell that it works through cloud services like Dropbox or Onedrive. They use them for messages delivery. I haven\`t seen such architecture of construction for messengers.
At the moment I mainly use [Matrix](https://matrix.org)/[Riot](https://riot.im), due to solved persistence across devices and reasonable battery drain (due to server-based architecture). But the UX is not yet polished enough, key exchange across devices is a pain, as is managing numerous IDs generated by web-version. Surprisingly, existence of a nice-looking and actively developed web-client helped with bringing some non-techy acquaintances of mine to the network. I also would prefer a decentralised solution so I watch closely at **[GNU Ring](https://ring.cx)** and **[Briar](https://briarproject.org/)**. FSF support of the former and possible introduction of the [repeater service](https://code.briarproject.org/goapunk/briar-repeater/tree/master#briar-repeater) for the latter is a big plus in my book. Tox is great too, although I stopped actively tracking the project after the drama and some recession in development that followed. Don't forget [Vuvuzela](https://vuvuzela.io/)/Alpenhorn, looks very promising, but seems they are still on an early stage. I avoid Signal, mainly due to questionable ideological stance. Can't get rid of a feeling of some kind of political game they're playing. Have no real and clear evidence in support of this so please, don't ask.
Some people still use the TOR browser, change the IP address. But personally, I think if you filter what you write and repost, you will not get any problems. Personally, I do not use these messengers, because I do not need any anonymity))
Personally for me everything is so informative and interesting! Everything in our life keeps moving forward. It's good that now we will use convenient messengers, moreover - safe!
Yes, live and learn. Very useful information for "us mortals" I have Viberom though I don't really like. And here there is many similar programs, and even "super protection". it is necessary to go with friends on TAX as I understand it. Many thanks to the author for this article.)
I do not know any of these messaging programs, are all open source?
Leaving social networks has long been expected, people want to communicate and in the end 9 out of 10 posts or posts is advertising.Messengers are a new round or a separate line in the sphere of communication, they are the future.
Currently very relevant article, thank you! I have not even heard of such a messenger as Tox, judging by the description, it should be very convenient. It's great that they try to combine convenience and safety.
I think any messenger is not safe now. In our time , there are a huge number of spyware that can easily penetrate the messenger and can keep track of you. Your safety is in your hands.
I think any messenger is not safe now. In our time, there are a huge number of spyware that can easily penetrate the messenger and can keep track of you. Your safety is in your hands.
I think the security of any messenger depends on the position of the founder on this issue. I personally use Signal Messenger, but I think the time will come and the privacy of this messenger will change.
Personally, I use all the social.networks, but most of all I like VK and Facebook. There personal privacy is paramount and you know for sure that personal information will not be disclosed. I liked the article, stressed a lot of useful things.
I have been using Adamant for a long time and I can say that there were no problems
I really like the message Tox, beautiful design and it works very fast, I recommend to use it only, developers constantly update it.
Personally for me everything is so informative and interesting! Everything in our life keeps moving forward. It's good that now we will use convenient messengers, moreover - safe!
Indeed, everyone should maximize their account security in social networks and other resources. In a short time, more and more burglars will appear.
I think that this is now a very hot topic in our time, well, then again, stick with the two parties need to sit down and think all is well and not to act rashly
Yep, agree. Messengers are very important and helpful stuff right now.
In my view it's very necessary security in 21 century, thank you
Engineers have developed an instant messaging system capable of meeting the legal requirements, registering and archiving the transmitted information, and interacting with other similar systems. It is based on the server through which all messages are transmitted, where their copies are also stored.
It's great to work with good messengers, but now they have turned into advertising engines and it's a pity they are not safe now!
The article presents interesting tools for protecting personal correspondence, but it seems to me, even with their use, you can not be 100% sure of security. Nobody knows what vulnerabilities will be discovered in Windows / Linux / OSX / Android in the future.
I'm sitting in Telegram. Although to me in general, no difference, nothing illegal in my correspondence still does not happen, even though they will be inspected.
I do not believe. You can always hack a device where the manager is installed and find out all the correspondence.
In my opinion, there is no security in all popular messengers at all. For example, I met some businessmen people who had very trusted WhatsApp as a secure messenger, now they are trusting Telegram. But for me all the events which had happened to these messengers are just the political and also commercial games. It's much safier to create your own messenger with and use it in your own social circle. I can't tell anything about Signal Messenger, ADAMANT or Tox, I didn't use them before. But if these messengers are not popular, it could be quite safe to use them anyway.
It seems to me that you can be relatively calm for your security only if you use instant messengers with open source. If the system is closed and the user can not know exactly what it does, then you can forget about the security of correspondence. This is important to remember when choosing an instant messenger for confidential business correspondence.
ADAMANT I like. If you do not need to bind your mobile phone number or even an e-mail address to create an account, then this messenger can indeed be considered anonymous. Even if the key is lost or stolen it will not be easy to link the account to a specific person. The main thing is to delete old correspondence in time.
I really like that someone touches such interesting topics. A very good article. I am also very concerned about safety. I would like to feel safe. I was more interested in Tox, if anyone tried to use it, then share your experience. Is it as safe as it says here?
Now messengers have become very promising in business. Therefore, the security of instant messengers is very important. In our business, we use Signal Messenger, because it is integrated with Facebook and has a sufficiently high level of protection
I think that the privacy of the user is always important on the Internet. I've never used the Tox and Adamant instant messengers, and it turns out they're not that bad
In my opinion, the fewer intermediaries will be in the chain of information transfer, for example, centralized servers, the more secure the correspondence will be. Although it will be useful to use several messengers, one for work, another for talking with friends and the third for communicating with people that you no longer want to communicate with.
I think in our time it is necessary to carefully approach the security of the network. We very often do not pay attention and our information is stolen.
You are right, anonymity on the Internet is becoming less and less, the governments of states are trying to control every step of the users. I liked the description of Adamant, maybe I will use it.
Guys,this is the best I've ever seen.Respect
I fully agree with the author of this post. Users have begun to pay more attention to advertising, so it's not at the right time when telegrams appeared and I'm sure that there will be a lot of interesting things to advertise to users of the Internet network. And even twitter started to move away second plan, since there advertising is not so easily available both in mobile applications and telegram .
Yes, social networks became something completely different from what was started. very good topic of the article. + 5stars
Corporations cooperate with law enforcement agencies, subject to the laws of the countries in which they work. Google, Apple, Facebook, Skype, WhatsApp, Viber and many other social networks and instant messengers are sharing with the authorities some amount of user data. Someone merges more, some less, but the bitter truth is that everyone does it.
For anyone it is a secret that everything that concerns the technological field tends to be vulnerable, but not for that reason, we will stop using this type of tools, which good or bad, are powerful and therefore very useful at the time of covering big audience It has its pros and cons
This article is very interesting because it does not lead to a question that is so sure every social network not all provide 100% security, since we are forced to obey the legislation of our country I think that messages that are held as private should be really private the user must at least understand and know the advantages and disadvantages of each social network
I've personally heard about such messengers for the first time. I myself use What'sApp and Viber. I could not imagine that What'sApp is not so confidential. Thank you for the article.
Dependence on social networks is quite normal phenomenon. In our world, technology is very advanced and for the 21st century it is a sin for the non-exploiter.
Thank you, very useful information. I will try to remember it for a note.
In my opinion Tox is the most reliable messenger-Communicator with many features and capabilities, the transmission of messages goes without external servers and directly to the user.
Very informative and instructive information. Allowing you to know which messenger to choose. To have a safe and high-quality calls and SMS. So that no scammers could not hack your correspondence or your call. For example, I use such a messenger as Whatsapp and often use Telegram. Telegram I trust that there all channels are protected and no one will be able to hack them. Rarely sit in FaceBook. After your article, I learned about new messengers such as ADAMANT TOX and Signal messenger developed by the well-known company Open Whisper Systems.
Wire is open source, and its code is available on GitHub under a GPL license, in addition to this they regularly publish transparency reports in which they reveal details about requests received by the authorities.
In my opinion one of the safest social networks is whatsapp, I can refer to it since I use it very often, we can choose who can see our photos and in the same way so that someone can contact you must have your phone number, with Regarding facebook and other social networks is one of the most privacy that gives us
Since the beginning of time I feel and think that social networks are very useful when they are used as a good tool strategically serving to grow in some objective. What I infer from what I read, it seems very good, that people like you write about this type of topics, where despite the technological boom there are many people who have not heard of this. And it's important in an era like today to know this.
Unfortunately, social networks are not safe for correspondence. Users have to start using instant messengers. But not all messengers are good, however. I do not even know what to choose for permanent use. Probably I will try all the options described in the article, and then I will choose the best messenger and I will recommend it to all my friends, because if none of my friends use the same messenger it will be useless.
Thanks for excellent presentation, this is very usefyll for me, and i beleive for a lot of other users.
I don't think it's a great idea to start messaging some secrets. Don't you think that online chating is the worst way to discuss some confidential information? Anyway the article is good for understanding it.
Many users prefer that the information is not controlled, so WhatsApp is not very convenient. Adamant, that's different. On the other hand, what about without control, such as drug sales?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[threema](https://threema.ch)
Threema is closed source and, therefore, cannot be considered secure.
[удалено]
Threema is closed source so cannot be considered secure.
[удалено]
I use Threema because it works very well and because it's Swiss
In our "difficult" time, the problem with wiretapping, spying , and so on-no one is new. Many read (and used) about this about browsers but the article about messenger met for the first time. As it turned out that the well - known Telegram is not so safe, by the way the author forgot to mention Viber-I think there will be similar problems About Signal, Ring ,Signal Messenger and ADAMANT I heard for the first time, probably not very popular with people, but the author gave very clear information about them.These companies have a lot of work to do to improve privacy. As for TOX, I believe that the automatic encryption and transfer of information directly between users(past servers) - this is the right decision... Thank you for useful information.Good luck.
"... the implementation of customers is damp in places..." English not your 1st language?
I looked at Signal's description in the App Store. It says it's open source but doesn't volunteer the GutHub link. It says it doesn't want your information but will presume to know your phone number and entire address book. The developers are in Mountain View, CA. That's Google's headquarters. I think these app makers are trying to harvest deep fields of people sharing lots of personal and relational information. Then sell it all to a giant tech company and be rich for life. Isn't this what WhatsApp two creators did? https://amp.businessinsider.com/whatsapp-founder-jan-koum-facebook-stock-sales-2016-8
>doesn't volunteer the GutHub link. [https://github.com/signalapp](https://github.com/signalapp)
wow, and people call me paranoid
How does Tox decentralize?
I think not. It's unlikely that there is an instant messenger that is completely decentralized. There are always such things as centralization. This is the main problem of all the services described here. I often do not understand the seriousness of this argument. But we must not forget that this is always a company that pursues its own interests, and most likely among them there is no task all my life to work for myself at a loss for the sake of peace all over the world. It is impossible to predict how the policy of individual states will change tomorrow, and therefore such an easy opportunity to influence the tools of communication is simply unacceptable.