LibreSignal VS Synapse

>what does this mean?

Moxie (Signal's founder) has thrown fits in the past over the existence of third-party clients using their servers: https://github.com/libresignal/libresignal/issues/37#issueco...

0: https://github.com/libresignal/libresignal/issues/37

I push back when anyone recommends Signal because they are fundamentally not an open network.

OWS has historically been hostile to third party implementations outside of their clients. There are multiple unofficial options but the only one I've been looking at is the bridge with matrix, though setting up a matrix server just for this is likely overkill.

I have to say that I find him fascinating too, but there are a few things that raise my suspicion, but of course do not convict him of anything:

The way he is attacking this alternative Signal client and rules out interoperability:

https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...

Signal was a word before he decided to turn it into a brand.

The signal server source code repo was not updated for a year. Communication intransparent.

https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/04/06/it-looks-like-signa...

I am not even against crypto integration, but I found the choice of MobileCoin odd. Instead of integrating an existing privacy coin or working with the community, he decided to integrate MOB and to be one of their "advisors":

https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/24/mobilecoin-moxie-marlinspi...

https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/mobilecoin

Is that so surprising? Signal had always a hostile attitude to alternative clients. They have this weird disconnect of the new CEO saying they want to be available to as many people as possible and be a fully commited FOSS app, and then have no version on F-Droid (while Telegram has!) and actively fight alternative clients (see https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...)

Because of this hostility Signal is not a trustworthy organization at all.

LibreSignal existed before Moxie was like “no, don’t”: https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal

They have shut down third party clients, and resve the roght to continue that.

https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...

1) You need to audit that code, which.. everyone will have to do.

2) https://signal.org/blog/reproducible-android/

> the Signal Android codebase includes some native shared libraries that we employ for voice calls (WebRTC, etc). At the time this native code was added, there was no Gradle NDK support yet, so the shared libraries aren’t compiled with the project build.

a good answer in my opinion, but it means what you run from the play store is not reproducible and thus can never really be confirmed to be what the sources actually include. There are also binary blobs needed for interacting with Google Play.

3) Signal is openly hostile to third party client implementations: https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37

Moxie Marlinspike on May 5th 2016:

> I'm not OK with LibreSignal using our servers, and I'm not OK with LibreSignal using the name "Signal." You're free to use our source code for whatever you would like under the terms of the license, but you're not entitled to use our name or the service that we run.

> If you think running servers is difficult and expensive (you're right), ask yourself why you feel entitled for us to run them for your product.

Moxie Marlinspike left Signal this January[2] 2022.

Whose to say whether there will be any change, but it's been interesting seeing Signal as a somewhat defended property. Although various third party clients/tools/libraries do exist already.

The claim that running servers is expensive would have been more interesting, imo, had there been any viable way to run your own. But for a long while Signal server source code wasn't being updated at all.

[1] https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...

[2] https://signal.org/blog/new-year-new-ceo/

What are you thinking of here? Synapse has supported purging room history since 2016: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/pull/911, and configurable data retention since 2019: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/pull/5815.

Meanwhile, Matrix has never needed the full room history to be synchronised - when a server joins a room, it typically only grabs the last 20 messages. (It does needs to grab all the key-value state about the room, although these days that happens gradually in the background).

If you're wondering why Matrix implementations are often greedy on disk space, it's because they typically cache the key-value state aggressively (storing a snapshot of it for the room on a regular basis). However, that's just an implementation quirk; folks could absolutely come up with fancier datastructures to store it more efficiently; it's just not got to the top of anyone's todo list yet - things like performance and UX are considered much more important than disk usage right now.

some context re the Matrix isses, long history apparently: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/14481#issuecomm...

Why not Matrix? Here's one reason: it has incredibly hard-to-debug edge cases, and plenty of bugs. One of my favourites is the one where people are kicked out of your room at random, which was reported a year ago[0]. It wasn't fixed, however, because the head of the Matrix foundation (Matthew) presumably didn't like the issue being posted on Twitter.

This is honestly really disappointing behaviour from a platform owner.

[0]: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/14481

> That doesn't make this situation any less bad to the rest of the community.

How is the community suffering here? Let's say Element adds a bunch of baller stuff to their versions over the next few months and then closes the source. Can't the community just fork the last AGPL version? You might say, "well then no one can take the AGPL fork and make their own closed-source business", but do you want them to? Even if you do, they still can with the existing Apache-licensed version, just like Element is doing right now.

You're arguing that Element will lose a lot of contributions, but TFA points out that despite being super open, the vast majority of contributions are still made by Element employees (which seems to be true [0]). It's not the case that Element is looking to monetize the (small) contributions of others, it is the case that others are looking to monetize the (huge) contributions of Element.

And besides, aren't the MSCs the core of Matrix? It's already super possible to build your own compliant client and server.

The situation is that Element needs money to keep developing the ecosystem. It would be cool if there were a big network of donors and contributions, but there isn't. You're essentially saying, "that's fine, go out of business then, and the community will keep developing the ecosystem", but that's not happening now, and it can still happen anyway with the Apache-licensed versions, which again people can still contribute to.

[0]: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/graphs/contributors