While Windows does allow for code signing of executable files in general, I doubt Signal is using their system.
When I read tptacek's rant nowadays, the immediate thing I can think is, "The web is malleable? Literally every single computing environment and device I own is malleable." It feels like if I were to take tptacek's advice to its logical conclusion, I would just conclude that ETE encryption in general is dead. In theory, I could disable auto-updates and only update Signal when I looked at the source code, just like in theory I could examine the JS that I'm executing every time I connect to a site.
#Firefox tabs plus signs faded install#
So for an extremely typical user like me, who has been taught for as long as I can remember that the most secure thing you can do on an OS is install updates as they come in when they come in, doesn't Signal have the exact same problems as Mozilla? If someone compromises Signal's servers, can't they add a side-channel just as easily? An attacker only needs to install one back door, they don't need to update it a hundred times. In any case, it doesn't matter that Signal is updated "rarely". If I were on an iOS device, I wouldn't even have that option - to the best of my knowledge you can not turn off app auto-updates on an iPhone, but maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
So there's nothing to prevent Signal from updating itself and changing the crypto. On my Android device, I also have auto-update turned on, because my only option is to turn it on for every app or none of them. Additionally, I don't ever check Signal before installing a new update, I just blindly do it. On the Linux computer it doesn't have root access, but it does have access to its own files, so in theory there's nothing to prevent it from making a network request and updating itself. I have Signal running on my Linux computer and on my Android phone.
0 kommentar(er)
