2026-05-04 08:31 UTC
Replies (4)
-
@n2o@23.social 2026-05-04 08:41
@vieuxrenard @signalapp Not sure how they would rule that out without checking content. Which they won't. Ever. I hope.
-
@andrec@mastodon.social 2026-05-04 09:01
@vieuxrenard @signalapp This is because a) a profiles name and image is stored and send encrypted and cannot be accessed. b) you'll never catch every last fishy name/image and if a user thinks it's impossible for users to name themselves like that, the user will be more likely to trust "Signal Sυpport" and won't notice that this is not an "u" but "υ" (Greek upsilon). TLDR: Prohibition of some problematic profile names won't make it harder for attackers.
-
@flxtr@social.tchncs.de 2026-05-04 11:46
@vieuxrenard Others pointed out, that public filter code/list would be the only way and that'd be easy to bypass. In my opinion, Signal’s biggest mistake is that, through their fake marketing contact, they’ve already gotten users used to the idea that Signal would message them through an official channel in the app. So now they always have to write: “We would never message our users to ask for login credentials,” instead of simply being able to say that they would never message users at all. This reminds me a bit of banks that kept telling you what they would never do via email, until they actually did it. (Sending links, links pointing to online banking logins, links pointing to other domains (tracking links), etc.) @signalapp
-
@flxtr@social.tchncs.de 2026-05-04 21:49
@vieuxrenard Hey, WhatsApp Support here. We contact you via Signal, because your WA account seems compromised. PIN plz. 🥹🙏 Thx @signalapp