@yogthos@Ulrich It is also besides the point because whether he wants to call it metadata or not, Signal still has that information.
Signal might well share every subpoena they can. However, NSLs can come with gag orders. Even if they wanted to tell you what was going on, they couldn’t.
Exactly, what we call this information is entirely besides the point. What matters is that it’s being collected, and nobody outside the people operating the server knows how this information is used. If somebody says they trust Whisper and make a conscious choice to share that information with the company that’s perfectly fine. However, telling people that the problem doesn’t exist is dangerously dishonest.
Do you think if they were giving away extra information in NSLs and witholding that information in public subpoenas that no one would ask questions or hold them accountable for that?
@yogthos @Ulrich It is also besides the point because whether he wants to call it metadata or not, Signal still has that information.
Signal might well share every subpoena they can. However, NSLs can come with gag orders. Even if they wanted to tell you what was going on, they couldn’t.
Exactly, what we call this information is entirely besides the point. What matters is that it’s being collected, and nobody outside the people operating the server knows how this information is used. If somebody says they trust Whisper and make a conscious choice to share that information with the company that’s perfectly fine. However, telling people that the problem doesn’t exist is dangerously dishonest.
Do you think if they were giving away extra information in NSLs and witholding that information in public subpoenas that no one would ask questions or hold them accountable for that?