73
Why Signal Calls Google (media.ccc.de)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/degoogle@lemmy.ml
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I just started my de-googling journey recently, and so the mechanics of notifications were still unclear to me, and I found this video super helpful.

It explains how most mobile messaging apps (including privacy-focused ones like Signal) rely on Google and Apple's centralized servers to deliver push notifications, which exposes vast amounts of user metadata.

Here's the YT link, for people who prefer it: https://youtu.be/c3ennD3wKn0

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 4 months ago (3 children)

That is correct.

However, this is a quasi-monopoly by google having quietly overwhelmed the space. Same thing for RCS messaging.

Neither push notifications nor RCS are proprietary, so there is a possibility to tear oneself from google here.

For instance, there are several free and paid push notifications services. Pushbullet is a popular paid one, not too expensive. I personally use https://ntfy.sh/, which can be self-hosted.

RCS is different because trusting the encryption keys makes RCS work, so there would have to be a critical mass of buy-in to use an alternative to google's RCS implementation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    RCS is off-topic.

    Regarding Push, there is UnifiedPush which has already seen a wide adoption, e.g. Matrix. That's also the one used by Nfty. It's free and opensource and can be used by anyone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

    RCS is off-topic.

    Disagree, it serves to illustrate the same kind of monopoly google has on push notifications.

    UnifiedPush is not a push service, it is a distributor. It is a proxy for push services, it does not send out its own notifications.

    Also, ntfy does not need to use unified push, it simply makes put or post notifications, like it does in the self-hosted version. The public instance of ntfy does use unified push, yes. For instance, I do not want my http push notifications flying around in plain text with notifications about my private services being up or down, so I don't use one. I arrange the connectivity to my applications myself.

    Here again, google has done us all a disservice by obscuring the difference.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] -7 points 4 months ago

    I'm tired of having to correct people, but I will do it anyway.

    Disagree, it serves to illustrate the same kind of monopoly google has one push notifications.

    This is wrong. If you look up the definition for monopoly, you will realize it is false. At worst, it's a duopoly. If we exclude Huaweii Push, etc.

    UnifiedPush is not a push service, it is a distributor. It is a proxy for push services, it does not send out its own notifications.

    That is also wrong. Idk how you got the idea of it being a "proxy".

    "UnifiedPush is a decentralized push notification system that lets you choose the service you want to use. It’s designed to be privacy-friendly, flexible, and open — making it perfect if you want control over your push notifications."

    https://unifiedpush.org/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent