16 ms·
> registering without phone number as a paid option soon Replacing the need to register with a phone number with a requirement to pay is a better option how, e
by traceroute66 4d ago
> registering without phone number as a paid option soon
Replacing the need to register with a phone number with a requirement to pay is a better option how, exactly ?
- some_furry 4d agoIf your concern is "muh phone number", then you can pay and not have to give the phone number to sign up. It's already the case today (and has been for years) that you don't need to give strangers your phone number to chat on Signal. My username is soatok.45; try to get my phone number if you can. If you want absolutely no info to be collected, ever, and there to be zero cost on the end user too, be prepared to welcome your new spam overlords. Because the people who will benefit the most from a zero cost signup that only requires a username are spammers.
- my-huge-pony 3d agoI'm a bit surprised by this dismissal. Of course some info must be collected, or there must be some cost to enter (probably both I mean phone number is also a cost, but one most people already sunk). But we can still debate the best way, right? For example: * Are you absolutely positive signal will never have a bug that let attackers reveal contact phone numbers? I really trust in their secure coding skills, but this class of vulnerabilities (like 2fa leaj) happened to even the biggest players. * One of the reasons signal collects phone numbers (and asks for a contacts permission) is to check which contracts are already on signal. For some people or in some governments even having a signal account is an opsec problem (to be fair, they have a secure privacy-preserving protocol for this - as you know - and it's possible to avoid this footgun if necessary)
- thecrash 4d agoDecreases what info Signal needs to collect and retain about a user. When using an SMS verification as a proof, Signal needs to log the phone number, because if they didn't, one spammer could use one phone number to create 10^99 accounts. When using payment as proof, they can verify that payment occurred, validate the account and then immediately forget about the transaction. One spammer would still have to pay 10^99 times to create that many accounts.
- wolvoleo 4d agoPayment leaves a huge identification trail because of all the know your customer stuff these days. If they accept monero or something then ok but I doubt they will.
- Cider9986 4d agoThey could make it so all that is known by banks is that you purchased the service. Like how Nym does it or how you can buy Mullvad credits on Amazon. https://nym.com/zk-nyms https://nym.com/zk-nyms Ideally they accept Monero and do unlinkable payments but I doubt they will accept Monero. Hopefully they accept some crypto.
- traceroute66 4d ago> you can buy Mullvad credits on Amazon That is not the same thing. You buy a Mullvad scratch card on Amazon and you redeem the token string. Mullvad also offer the option to put your card number into the Mullvad website, and I'm sure many privacy conscious people would be very reluctant to do that. Card payments these days leave far too big a trail. The bank knows, the intermediary (e.g. Stripe) knows, and the merchant (e.g. Mullvad) has to keep records for accounting/tax requirements.
- DANmode 3d agoIt’d be pretty disappointing if they started including cryptocurrency features in their stack and didn’t accept it.
- crossroadsguy 4d agoAlso when they start dealing with payments there might be regulatory requirements like record keeping for a certain period.
- Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 3d agoI find convincing that phone numbers or payment is the best way to avoid spams at their scale.