You must log in or register to comment.
- ZenivEnglish9 hours
options exist you have no choice at this point rmap.world reticulum is working. I have a build that create a viral solution where you can host an open access point that hosts mesh chatx and allows people to host their own interface over web socket through wasm or an rnode over web serial it then helps them act as a repeater for the initial access point. This means anyone with a wifi capable device and a browser can spread the network and convert it over to reticulum even devices like iphones can still use the mesh chatx saas instance. We have to replace the central point of control the service providers. This is only getting worse even the most democratic nations are killing privacy.
- 11 hours
We are in this rediculous combination of situations where for a few grand, AI can sniff out vulnerabilities in software that a few years ago even the best expert teams didnt find, and at the same time, we have elected representatives deliberately weakening software security and introducing new vulnerabilities via law.
This will not reduce crime.
- arockinyourshoe@lemmy.worldEnglish12 hours
So, I’ve been looking into moving off of other messengers in favour of Signal. Its the only one I want to use, not that anyone else I know uses it.
WhatsApp is what my workplace uses, but their customer service has told me there is nothing they can do to set up an account, so I’d given up
If Signal leaves Canada, where does that leave me? Am I just shit out of luck? Do I have to quit my job?
- 10 hours
You can use a vpn to connect to Ireland then pay a onetime payment for numberless Signal registration then always connect to foreign vpn to avoid getting banned all thanks to bill c-22
- 11 hours
If work uses whatsapp, you use whatsapp for work. Also, polish that resume.
- 23 hours
Reminder that Signal is used by the Canadian Armed Forces because it’s the only messaging app that meets their security requirements.
- Binturong@lemmy.caEnglish5 hours
Damn, if only there were some way to… I don’t know… Make their fucking own app! Is this really not something people have considered?
- 4 hours
No, because that’s a really bad idea.
Look, I get where you’re coming from, but if you already have something that’s the gold standard for secure encrypted messaging, you don’t try to reinvent that. First, it’s money you don’t have to spend, and second, in the process of getting it right you get to discover all the ways they got it wrong. Why introduce that unknown element?
To be clear, the CAF aren’t texting each other fire coordinates. They have secure radios and DND email that’s only accessible on secured devices. That’s where all the secret secret stuff goes. But there’s a lot of stuff that happens day to day that still needs to be secure, but accessible. In Latvia, especially, our soldiers are always being tracked by Russian operatives. You’re literally not allowed to go anywhere alone because you could get black bagged. So if you need to text your unit about drinks plans, that shit needs to be secure. Soldiers need safe ways of communicating without a $20,000 radio set.
Signal works and it works well. One of the biggest mistakes in military procurement is trying to make something new when the tool you need already exists. Especially when that existing tool comes at a low low cost of free.
Of all the thing the people are worried about and would want legislation to get more protection from, criminals communicating in secret is pretty damn low on the priority list. Especially when their “solution” for it is so damn invasive to everyone.
How about they do something about the increasingly invasive data collection everyone is being subject to by big tech whether they want to or not? You can’t even buy a car anymore that doesn’t come with a built-in location tracker.
- 11 hours
I would rather get legal protection from criminals attacking me.
For example, scammers, spammers, and malware spreaders who want to steal my identity and/or money.
Legislating new vulnerabilities into my devices make those worse!
Edit: immagine a world where instead of weakening security, legislators were working to stop this: https://haveibeenpwned.com/PwnedWebsites
- Subscript5676@piefed.caEnglish10 hours
If a public service isn’t safe for criminals to communicate anymore, they’ll just use something else. Plain and simple.
And so all the legislators end up doing, effectively, is to trample on everyone else’s privacy.
- 21 hours
This bill should not be able to pass at all in any shape or form.
Also if anyone argues about protecting the children for example or has a point about online safety, remind them that the CIRA provides a DNS service for Canadians.
- wrinkle2409@lemmy.cafeEnglish20 hours
It’s so surprising that he is insisting on this bill even though almost the whole English speaking world is warning that it is shit. Is it pride? Is he getting paid to do it? What the fuck
- 20 hours
Canada has a case of Carneymania even though the liberals are passing unpopular bills. 47% public support is too high for Mark Carney’s neoliberalism.
Looks like they need to consider the other choices and avoid the con.
- 13 hours
Practically, what would this mean for an end user? Will Signal be forced to simply pull the app from Google Play and iTunes for Canadians? I sideload the APK through Obtainium (which can source directly from signal.org) anyway. And unless the government makes it possible to go after end users directly, why would I stop? It’s my device, I should be able to run whatever code on it I damn well please.
Or will Signal be required to reject Canadian messaging traffic entirely?
- 11 hours
Just the act of pulling it from apple and googles stores will basically kill it in Canada because suddenly none of your contacts will be on it.
Signal is the first private messenger that managed to get mainstream enough to get some network effect going. There are plenty of alternatives if you only want to talk to privacy nerds who jump through hoops sideload apps from alternative stores.
- 22 hours
The secrecy requirements is also a terrible thing for transparency and accountability.
Can’t wait for a ministerial order to request broad data without proper oversight. /sIf the government needs to operate in the shadow to maintain law and order, they aren’t better than the criminals they’re fighting against. We don’t need this bill to accomplish public safety, there’s already an established process and it’s called a warrant.
Write letters to your senators voicing your opposition to surveillance bill c-22.
- 12 hours
Bill C-22 is a bad bill and can cause us some difficulties down the road. On the other hand I don’t like a tech corp strong-arming us to change our policies. Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right.
- 1 day
So, someone please educate me here. Doesn’t law enforcement already have access to digital information during investigations? I think companies already retain metadata, even if they say they don’t. And, wouldn’t it be like any investigation where you would need a court order to get that information?
Bill C-22, formally the Lawful Access Act, 2026, is a proposed Canadian federal law about giving police and intelligence agencies access to digital information during investigations. It would update rules for obtaining subscriber information and other data, and require some service providers to support lawful access requests. Parliament of Canada
The bill is controversial because critics say its provisions could expand surveillance, require companies to retain certain metadata, and pressure providers to make their systems accessible to authorities—potentially weakening encryption. The government presents it as a way to help law enforcement investigate serious crimes.
- 21 hours
The difference is that metadata needs to be retained for a year by any and all online services available to Canadians.
It also asks that companies or services that don’t retain metadata to do so. The wording is also so generic that it includes personal websites, or sites like lemmy as well. It also means communication you might have with your lawyers or therapists must be completely logged and retained for a year as well.
It also at one point asked to provide backdoors so that police could access all data as soon as needed without warrants or roadblocks.
Services like signal for example would not be able to comply with any of these requests, one it would break encryption, and two they don’t retain any logs on their servers.
The issue with all this now is that it exposes all Canadian to a large surface area of data breaches. It also makes it more likely that many more Canadians will become victims of fraud and scams.
