Well, centralized routing and US government investment shouldn't change
   the math of the security itself. So long as the design is secure, that
   shouldn't really matter.
   Regardless, can you see any flaw in my reasoning regarding the signal
   protocol's advantage over simple public key encryption? Thank you!
   David

   On Sun, Jan 24, 2021, 1:53 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0
   <[1]punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:

     On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 13:02:24 -0800
     David Barrett <[2]dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
     > Signal  protocol ...on the surface it seems _really_ complicated
     in order to
     > protect against only a very narrow range of attacks.
     >
             that is my impression as well. On the other hand signal has
     very serious propblems like requiring people to link their
     'identity' to a retarphone and the fact that all messages are routed
     through signal-NSA servers. I.e. signal is fully centralized.
             you have to take into account that 'moxie' got 3 millions
     from the US govt. And a lot more from some other silicon valley
     oligarch.

References

   1. mailto:punks@tfwno.gf
   2. mailto:dbarrett@expensify.com