From 0295036a8982d60e2514ffb2ab41ef81dc9cf755 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: rsiddharth Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2021 01:30:51 -0500 Subject: md/article: add better-than-whatsapp.md --- md/article/better-than-whatsapp.md | 237 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 237 insertions(+) create mode 100644 md/article/better-than-whatsapp.md (limited to 'md/article') diff --git a/md/article/better-than-whatsapp.md b/md/article/better-than-whatsapp.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8c2701b --- /dev/null +++ b/md/article/better-than-whatsapp.md @@ -0,0 +1,237 @@ + + +# Better than WhatsApp: Try these Free Software Apps and Services + +We recommend using Free Software apps[1](#fn-1) like +[Element][1], [Quicksys][2] or [Conversations][3] that connect to Free +Software powered services. These services allow users to choose their +service provider without losing the ability to talk to users of other +providers following the same standard. Free Software ensures users' +freedom and interoperable services ensure there is no vendor lock-in. + +[1]: https://element.io +[2]: https://quicksy.im +[3]: https://conversations.im + +## Comparison of different apps and services + +1. Non-free software client and server + centralization (Example + WhatsApp): does not respect user's freedom and creates vendor + lock-in. + +2. Free Software client but non-free server + centralization (Example + Telegram): client software respects freedom, server software does + not respect freedom and creates vendor lock-in. + +3. Free Software client and server + centralization (Example Signal): + respect user's freedom but creates vendor lock-in. + +4. Free Software client and server + federation (Example Matrix and + Quicksy/XMPP): respects users' freedom (as a user or as a + community) and no vendor lock-in. + +5. Free software client + peer to peer design (Example Briar, Tox): + respects users' freedom and no vendor lock-in. + +## Some basic concepts + +[Vendor lock-in][v-li]: Ability to switch service + is too hard because it requires convincing every contact to move to + a new service. + +[Peer-to-Peer Design][p2p]: Design which enables a user to communicate +with another user directly without involving any service provider in +between. Both parties need to be online at the same time for the +design to work efficiently. + +[End-to-End Encryption][e2e]: Only the users involved in a +communication can read the messages. + +[v-li]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in +[p2p]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer +[e2e]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-to-end_encryption + +## WhatsApp and other non-free apps + +WhatsApp app is a non-free software which does not respect user's +freedom and privacy. WhatsApp does not provide its users the access +to its source code and actively bans anyone creating a Free Software +app that can connect to WhatsApp service. They claim their app +provides end-to-end encryption, but we cannot verify if they actually +implemented end-to-end encryption without any backdoors (access of app +remotely without user's permission) or loopholes. Being non-free app is +enough to reject WhatsApp so we are not going to talk about other bad +things about WhatsApp. + +There are three broad categories of messaging systems with Free +Software apps - Centralized services, Federated services and +Peer-to-Peer systems. + +## A. Centralized services + +A centralized service is one in which every one is forced to use the +same provider. Setups such as this has many disadvantages such as +vendor lock-in, being more susceptible to back-doors by government, +the whole world getting dependent on a single organization for their +communications. Centralized services also have a single point of +failure. The organization controlling the service can be sold to a +different organization, change or even shut down the operation, set +their own terms of service and privacy policy, [forbid the third-party +apps from connecting to the centralized service][libresignal-issue]. + +[libresignal-issue]: https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issuecomment-217211165 + +
+
Telegram
+
+

Pros: Compared to WhatsApp, Telegram provides + Free Software app which means end-to-end encryption can be verified + to be working as claimed.

+ +

Allows + bots and bridges to connect to other services making it possible + to participate in Telegram group chats without using Telegram.

+ +

Cons: Free software app is often not enough + to provide full control over your communications. For example, + Telegram's apps (Android, desktop, iOS) are free software but still + the service is centralized like WhatsApp. So only Telegram's app + respects your freedom but not the service.

+ +

There is no end-to-end encryption by + default in Telegram and messages in groups are not encrypted.

+ +

Needs phone number for signing up.

+ +

Summary: We gained Free Software app and + bridges but lost end-to-end encryption by default.

+
+ +
Signal
+
+

Pros: Signal app is Free Software like + Telegram, and in comparison to Telegram it offers server software + also as Free Software which makes it better than Telegram.

+ +

End to end encryption is enabled by default and groups + chats are also encrypted.

+ +

Minimal + + metadata + collected on the server.

+ +

Cons: Even though you are allowed to setup + Signal service yourself, the users of your service will not be able + to talk to users of official Signal server, making it practically a + vendor lock-in.

+ +

Needs phone number for signing up.

+ +

Summary: Signal is better than WhatsApp and + Telegram.

+
+
+ +## B. Federated services + +A federated system is a collection of independent service providers +which can communicate with each other. Federation is important to take +full control of your communications. +You can choose a trusted provider or be a service provider +yourself. No single entity can force their terms on users. +Examples of federated systems are mobile phones, emails, matrix , XMPP +etc. For example, you can buy a SIM card from any mobile service +provider and talk or send SMS to subscribers of other +providers. Similarly, you can create an email account with any service +provider and send emails to people who are registered with a different +email provider. + +
+
Quicksy
+
+

Pros: Federated with XMPP, Control over the + policies of the services, switch to any XMPP + provider without losing ability to talk to all + your Quicksy contacts.

+ +

End to end encryption is enabled by + default and group chats are also encrypted + by default.

+ +

Cons: Needs phone number for signing up

+ +

Summary: Quicksy is better than Signal + because of its federated design.

+
+ +
XMPP via apps like Conversations, Dino
+
+

Pros: In addition to all pros of Quicksy, + the phone number/email is not mandatory for an account. If you + self-host, metadata retention is under your control.

+ +

Cons:The process of choosing a service + provider and creating an account can appear to be difficult + since it may be unfamiliar, no + automatic contact discovery.

+
+ +
Matrix via apps like Element, FluffyChat
+
+

Pros: In addition to all pros of XMPP, + Matrix asks your permission before you are added to a personal + chat or added to a group chat.

+ +

Cons: The process of choosing a service + provider and creating an account can appear to be difficult + since it may be unfamiliar, no automatic contact discovery.

+ +

Summary: XMPP/Matrix is better than Quicksy + from perspective of privacy and freedom at the cost of a bit + inconvenience of creating accounts and finding other users + automatically.

+ +

Note: Since XMPP/Matrix allows you to have + your choice of apps instead of the ones mentioned above, please + chose apps which support end to end encryption + (OMEMO for XMPP). The choices we + mentioned have end to end encryption by default.

+
+
+ +### C. Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems + +Peer-to-peer instant messengers can talk directly without requiring +any servers. Examples are [Briar][briar], [Tox][tox] and [GNU +Jami][jami], etc. The messages are end-to-encrypted and are stored +only locally in the devices since there are no servers involved. There +are no servers that could intercept your communications, so it gives +you the ultimate privacy and freedom. To exchange messages, both peers +need to be online, which might be a bit inconvenient. + +[briar]: https://briarproject.org +[tox]: https://tox.chat +[jami]: https://jami.net + +## Conclusion + +We recommend you to choose any federated system or peer-to-peer +messenger according to your use-case so that you get full control of +your communications, freedom and privacy. It is very important to +reject proprietary services like WhatsApp which takes freedom away +from the user. [FSF India][fsfi], [FSCI][fsci] or other volunteer-run +organization in India would be glad to extend support to anyone +needing more details on undergoing such a shift. + +[fsfi]: /contact +[fsci]: https://fsci.in/#join-us + +## Footnotes + +1. Any non-free app controls the user while [free software app is + controlled by its users][free-sw]. When we are talking about free + software, we not talking about price, we are concerned about + freedom. + +[free-sw]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html -- cgit v1.2.3