> It's just a demo instance, but, these front ends are barely revealed to the public
This genuinely doesn't look any different from the control panels of commercial infostealers and RATs sold on Russian hacking forums. Those usually sell for between $200 and $20,000 depending on features and pricing model (one-time vs. ongoing subscription).
These spyware companies hype themselves up, but they're really not any different from Ivan's RAT-as-a-Service, besides having extra exploits to burn and wealthier customers.
Same applies to other industries too btw, in drones world, so many companies that you see their names with multi billions contracts, but if you open the hood and see their hardware/software, it’s built on top of everyday open source tools duct taped together with some UI, and sales selling it as the next big (insert buzzword here) thing ever!
The first amendment only protects you unless the people in power say it doesn't. The government will pressure private companies to censor you. This was provably demonstrated under the Biden administration.
The second amendment is useless. One third to half of the country doesn't recognize the right to keep the majority of the useful arms that exist, nor the right to bear them in any meaningful way.
Third amendment is pretty obscure in our era. So far, at least. But you could make the roundabout argument that the Biden admin preventing landlords from evicting their unpaying tenants, particularly if those tenants were currently or previously employed by the military, would violate this amendment.
Fourth amendment doesn't matter anymore. We have entire government agencies whose primary purpose is to ignore this amendment. It's not even a conspiracy, nor a conspiracy theory. They do it in plain sight, and everyone knows, but apparently nobody cares (in which case why does the amendment even matter). Also, as long as the government gets the data from private companies (even if by force), that apparently doesn't constitute a fourth amendment violation these days.
Fifth amendment: civil asset forfeiture as disgustingly rampant all across the country. Not enough people know about it or care.
Sixth amendment: the term "speedy" regarding trials is an extremely loose one, especially now. Especially considering the government is apparently allowed to hold you indefinitely without an actual trial, without facing any repercussions.
Eighth amendment: judges impart excess fines quite often. See the Alex Jones case.
Ninth amendment: completely irrelevant now. If the government believes they have the right, though not explicitly enumerated, then they have the right.
That is, companies can make and sell it as long as they only sell it to governments and only the ones that we like.
Moxie's "unbreakable" end-to-end communication protocol.
Lol, so like ... all encryption schemes since the 70s?
Hashing is not encrypting.
You can learn more about the topic here, https://www.okta.com/identity-101/hashing-vs-encryption/
Load this page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard
Ctrl-F "hash". No mention of it.
Before being pedantic at least check out the url in that comment to get the basics going.
You're correct that a pure encryption algorithm doesn't use hashing. But real-world encryption systems will include an HMAC to detect whether messages were altered in transit. HMACs do use hash functions.
> Hashing is not encrypting.
> You can learn more about the topic here, https://www.okta.com/identity-101/hashing-vs-encryption/
Thank you for that link. Your original comment implied that Signal's threat model should have included an attacker-controlled end. The only way to do that is to make decryption impossible by anyone, including the intended recipient. A labyrinthine way to do that would be to substitute the symmetric-encryption algorithm with a hash algorithm, which of course destroys the plaintext, but does accomplish the goal of obfuscating it in transit, at rest, and forever.