Their arguments also don't make sense: they encrypt messages on Android, even though it has disk encryption as standard, but they won't encrypt messages on desktop which doesn't have disk encryption as standard!

Encryption is present on Signal-android because android's FDE is not usable enough, in Moxie's opinion (you can't set separate unlock and FDE pins, so people set really insecure ones). If/when android fixes this, signal-android will stop encrypting its database, too. Just like signal-desktop and signal-iOS.

I'm locking this conversation because the conversation has clearly run its course. Any continued discussion can happen on the forums.

Whisper.Backup.exportToDirectory("/tmp")

sqlcipher ~/.config/Signal/sql/db.sqlite \ "PRAGMA key = \"x'$(jq -r '.key' ~/.config/Signal/config.json)'\"; attach database 'plaintext.db' as plaintext key ''; SELECT sqlcipher_export('plaintext'); DETACH DATABASE plaintext;"

importing databases from the desktop app. I have no experience with that yet. WIP

The database key was never intended to be a secret. At-rest encryption is not something that Signal Desktop is currently trying to provide or has ever claimed to provide. Full-disk encryption can be enabled at the OS level on most desktop platforms.

I think the difficult thing for everybody to understand is why the database is encrypted in the first place? Are you saying that SQLCipher just offered better features and performance than using SQLite? Can you point to any discussion or documentation of that decision-making process?

/usr/bin/sqlcipher -list -noheader "$db" "PRAGMA key = \"x'"$key"'\";select json from messages;" >

However, because so many shells follow that convention of having 128 + signal_number, programs know to avoid using those values above 128 for their exit code (or when they do exit(130), it's to report the death of a child that dies of a signal 2 like some shells do under some circumstances).

Both kill with a job specifier and terminal signals send to the entire process group, so both the shell and sleep.

I am trying to understand how CTRL+C terminates a child but not a parent process. I see this behavior in some script shells like bash where you can start some long-running process and then terminate it by entering CTRL-C and the control returns to the shell. Could you explain how does it work and in particular why isn't the parent (shell) process terminated? Does the shell have to do some special handling of CTRL+C event and if yes what exactly does it do?

Remove your last "just in case" trap, and the script should work fine also with the EXIT traps. INT in the trap calling the cleanup should be the correct way to deal with the interrupts, however

In a way, the notification center on a mobile device has become the federation point for all communication apps, similar to how older desktop IM clients unified communication across multiple IM networks.

and

but

and

also

Experimental schemes like caching pre-generated temporary keys from the clients on the servers increase the server and protocol complexity, leading to lower reliability and more potential for mistakes that impact security.

And

But

rtone:

Just as journalists should be able to write about anything they want, comedians should be able to do the same and tell jokes about anything they please

In 2013, the Signal Protocol was introduced, which is based on OTR Messaging and the Silent Circle Instant Messaging Protocol (SCIMP). It brought about support for asynchronous communication ("offline messages") as its major new feature, as well as better resilience with distorted order of messages and simpler support for conversations with multiple participants.[11] OMEMO, introduced in an Android XMPP client called Conversations in 2015, integrates the Double Ratchet Algorithm used in Signal into the instant messaging protocol XMPP ("Jabber") and also enables encryption of file transfers. In the autumn of 2015 it was submitted to the XMPP Standards Foundation for standardisation.

The biggest advantage of matrix/megolm is that you can always add new client logins, that aren't tied to your mobile phone login (as opposed to whatsapp/signal).

As uber-secure messaging platform Signal has warned, “Signal is recommended by the United States military. It is routinely used by senators and their staff. American allies in the EU Commission are Signal users too. End-to-end encryption is fundamental to the safety, security, and privacy of conversations worldwide.”

When you make a call using Signal, it will generate a two-word secret code on both the profiles. You will speak the first word and the recipient will check it. Then he will speak the second word and you can check it on your end. If both the words match, the call has not been intercepted and connected to the correct profile

First, the recognition that sensitive information needs to be transmitted securely over instant messaging platforms plays into the hands of the privacy advocates who are against backdoors in the end-to-end encryption used on WhatsApp, Signal, Wickr, iMessage and others. The core argument from the privacy lobby is that a backdoor will almost certainly be exploited by bad actors. Clearly, the EU (and others) would not risk their own comms with such a vulnerability.

es:

The most popular modern secure messaging tool is Signal, which won the Levchin Prize at Real World Cryptography for its cryptographic privacy design. Signal currently requires phone numbers for all its users. It does this not because Signal wants to collect contact information for its users, but rather because Signal is allergic to it: using phone numbers means Signal can piggyback on the contact lists users already have, rather than storing those lists on its servers. A core design goal of the most important secure messenger is to avoid keeping a record of who’s talking to whom. Not every modern secure messenger is as conscientious as Signal. But they’re all better than Internet email, which doesn’t just collect metadata, but actively broadcasts it. Email on the Internet is a collaboration between many different providers; and each hop on its store-and-forward is another point at which metadata is logged. .

MelNet: A Generative Model for Audio in the Frequency Domain

This is spot on. An idea on its own does nothing. Execution and actually doing the hard work are the most important thing in any creative endeavour.

A Deep Generative Model of Speech Complex Spectrograms

but we have ample proof, that this did not arise from a principle of neces-sity, but conveniency

Unsupervised speech representation learning using WaveNet autoencoders

signal-boost

Stochastic Adaptive Neural Architecture Search for Keyword Spotting

WaveGlow: A Flow-based Generative Network for Speech Synthesis

Model Selection Techniques -- An Overview

Our results demonstrate the promise of spatio-temporalfiltering techniques for“tuning”measurement of hazard-related rumoring to enableobservation of rumoring at scales that have long been infeasible.

While theapplication in the online environment is novel, the general problem is not. Interest in automated signal processing in noisyenvironments (Fawcett and Provost,1999; Hamid et al., 2005; Macleod and Congalton,1998; Ribeiro et al., 2012; Singh,1989;Stauffer and Grimson, 2000) predates the proliferation of user-generated online activity, and we can apply the lessons learnedin those contexts to the online context.

Wire Privacy Whitepaper

Messenger Wire teilt Daten mit Analysefirma Mixpanel

We need security of signal in a world of complexity, in a world of noise and nonsense.

What you get is a mess.

As James P. Purdy wri