• thayer@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    While it would certainly be nice to see this addressed, I don’t recall Signal ever claiming their desktop app provided encryption at rest. I would also think that anyone worried about that level of privacy would be using disappearing messages and/or regularly wiping their history.

    That said, this is just one of the many reasons why whole disk encryption should be the default for all mainstream operating systems today, and why per-app permissions and storage are increasingly important too.

    • ooterness@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Full disk encryption doesn’t help with this threat model at all. A rogue program running on the same machine can still access all the files.

      • thayer@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 months ago

        It does help greatly in general though, because all of your data will be encrypted when the device is at rest. Theft and B&Es will no longer present a risk to your privacy.

        Per-app permissions address this specific threat model directly. Containerized apps, such as those provided by Flatpak can ensure that apps remain sandboxed and unable to access data without explicit authorization.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Exactly.

      I’ll admit to being lazy and not enabling encryption on my Windows laptops. But if I deployed something for someone, it would be encrypted.

    • Zak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I don’t recall Signal ever claiming their desktop app provided encryption at rest.

      I’m not sure if they’ve claimed that, but it does that using SQLCipher.