Privacy

32130 readers

354 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Instant Messengers Analysis and Comparison (privacy.awiki.org)

submitted 1 year ago by sir_reginald@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The table is quite big (190+ lines of hand-written HTML) and it doesn't fit on mobile phone screens unless you zoom out. It should be fine on desktop. It also specifies the criteria followed and has analysis of some of the IMs in the table (not close to all of them, I hope to add more analysis in the future).

Counter-arguments are always welcome. Sources and additional information too. Note that the typical privacy recommendation (Signal) is not recommended here. It does not meet our criteria, being centralized and requiring a phone number. I don't want to hate on Signal since it's doing a decent job spreading the importance of E2EE, however we can not recommend it for the given reasons.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's a million of these lists, all chosen critera's chosen carefully or outright false to fit their bias. Like why the hell is electron mentioned in a privacy comparison? XMPP is a protocol too, not a client, which makes comparison to Element make no sense, why would they not compare it to Matrix and ignore all of their other features? This list is complete shit.

[–] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

electron is mentioned in the OS supported section as a platform. Not taken into account for the privacy part, as you can see it is neither red or green. Also, there's not a single mention of Element, because it's just one client, yes.

I encourage you to read our criteria, I think you'll find it quite reasonable.

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You literally put Electron under the Matrix protocol. If you're going to judge it by its official client, you should do so with XMPP, whom doesn't even have an official client.

[–] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I just did a text search on the page and There's no mention of electron outside the Operating System support in the table, which is not taken into account for the rating.

And yes, I like that There's no official client for XMPP which helps it's independence from any entity or corporation, potential bad actors trying to push malicious features. But that's beyond my point.

I don't judge Element instead of Matrix. I just mention the OS support which is not rated and I make clear that there are other clients.

[–] kraniax@lemmy.wtf 1 points 1 year ago

can you even read? It's under supported OSs, and it says that it also has other clients in the same box.