Back

One piece of misinfo we need to address is the claim that there are ‘vulnerabilities’ in Signal. This isn’t accurate. Reporting on a Pentagon advisory memo appears to be at the heart of the misunderstanding: https://npr.org/2025/03/25/nx-s1-5339801/pentagon-email-signal-vulnerability. The memo used the term ‘vulnerability’ in relation to Signal—but it had nothing to do with Signal’s core tech. It was warning against phishing scams targeting Signal users. 2/

Phishing isn’t new, and it’s not a flaw in our encryption or any of Signal’s underlying technology. Phishing attacks are a constant threat for popular apps and websites. 3/

In order to help protect people from falling victim to sophisticated phishing attacks, Signal introduced new user flows and in-app warnings. This work has been completed for some time and is unrelated to any current events. If you’re interested in learning more, this WIRED article from February 19th (over a month ago) goes into more detail:
https://wired.com/story/russia-signal-qr-code-phishing-attack/ 4/

@signalapp
The technical level of security of Signal is irrelevant. Even using its vulnerability as an argument against it for secure government communications is merely a red herring, since the main issue is not the security breach, but the the Trump administration skirting government accountability and effectively creating an unaccountable shadow government outside the normal intelligence community..

@JamesTDG @Threadbane @signalapp “signal, the choice of the next nazi generation”… So much fucking around the world and the US ended fucking herself. I pity the level of both: electors and elected, dems and reps. It’s long since your democracy died, you are just realizing it now.

@pomubieng @JamesTDG @Threadbane @signalapp they were also concerned about the end points (personal cell pho'nes) being vulnerable.

For example, shoulder surfing of the guy on a plane in Russia. Compare that to using a secure facility