• I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Packet data has headers that can identify where it’s coming from and where it’s going to. The contents of the packet can be securely encrypted, but destination is not. So long as you know which IPs Signal’s servers use (which is public information), it’s trivial to know when a device is sending/receiving messages with Signal.

        This is also why something like Tor manages to circumvent packet sniffing, it’s impossible to know the actual destination because that’s part of the encrypted payload that a different node will decrypt and forward.

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          Packet data has headers that can identify where it’s coming from and where it’s going to

          Wouldn’t you have to have some sort of MITM to be able to inspect that traffic?

          This is also why something like Tor manages to circumvent packet sniffing

          TOR is what their already-existing tip tool uses.

          • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            Wouldn’t you have to have some sort of MITM to be able to inspect that traffic?

            That, or a court order telling your ISP or mobile operator to allow the sniffing. Or just the police wanting to snoop your stuff because they can. Not every country cares about individual or human rights, you know

            TOR is what their already-existing tip tool uses.

            Yes, but tor can be blocked at a firewall level, its packets are easy to identify. “Nations like China, Iran, Belarus, North Korea, and Russia have implemented measures to block or penalize Tor usage”

              • papertowels@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                18 hours ago

                If the header isn’t encrypted it’d be easy to inspect, and thus easy to determine where it goes, which is why it matters.

                Based on your questions, it sounds like you’re expecting the network traffic itself to be encrypted, as if there were a VPN. Does signal offer such a feature? My understanding is that the messages themselves are encrypted, but the traffic isn’t, but I could be wrong.

                • Ulrich@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  18 hours ago

                  If the header isn’t encrypted it’d be easy to inspect

                  Easy for whom? How are you getting access to the traffic info?

                  • papertowels@mander.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    17 hours ago

                    You’re talking about encryption and signal because you’re worried about folks whose network you’re connected to being able to invade your privacy, right?

                    I’d say it’s a pretty reasonable suggestion to say we start with those guys. If you don’t worry about those guys, who do have access to traffic info, then why bother with encryption?

          • Cenzorrll@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Wouldn’t you have to have some sort of MITM to be able to inspect that traffic?

            You mean like your workplace wifi that you’re blowing the whistle at?

      • papertowels@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        How exactly do you think encryption prevents the analysis of seeing when an encrypted message is sent? It feels like you’re trying to hand-waive away by saying “encryption means you’re good!”

        Cyber security is not my thing, but my understanding is that you’d still see network traffic - you just wouldn’t know what it says.

      • Natanael@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I run a cryptography forum

        Encryption doesn’t hide data sizes unless you take extra steps

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Like someone said the point is they can see the fact that you sent a secured message period. Not with the guardian app though.

          The entire point of the article in the OP is that you can send secured messages with The Guardian app. 🤦‍♂️

          • Cenzorrll@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Yes, the guardian app allows you to send encrypted messages through their app to their journalists. 100,000 people check the news, one person is whistleblowing. That one person’s messaging traffic is mixed in with the regular news data, so it’s not possible to tell which of those 100,000 people are the source. Signal messages travel through their servers, so anyone inspecting packets can see who is sending messages through signal, just not what the messages contain. Thats a big red arrow pointing to only people sending encrypted messages. With this implementation, those people are mixed in with everyone else just reading news or even just having the app on their device.

            • Ulrich@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              100,000 people check the news, one person is whistleblowing.

              There are many many more people using Signal to yell at their kids to do the dishes or some shit. Not whistleblowing.

              Thats a big red arrow pointing to only people sending encrypted messages.

              Everyone is using encrypted messages…

              • Roughknite@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                I’m sorry you can’t grasp this concept. I guess study a different subject.