ssm@lemmy.sdf.org to Privacy@lemmy.mlEnglish · 4 months agoMatrix? No, thanks.hackea.orgexternal-linkmessage-square13fedilinkarrow-up10arrow-down10cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up10arrow-down1external-linkMatrix? No, thanks.hackea.orgssm@lemmy.sdf.org to Privacy@lemmy.mlEnglish · 4 months agomessage-square13fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareJeena@piefed.jeena.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·4 months agoSomehow this article is full of “We didn’t read it but trust us …”
minus-squareSnot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-24 months agoLiterally all their issues were addressed by the very document they claimed wasn’t worth reading yet they linked to anyway… That was in 2019. So they solved this persons complaints five years ago. https://www.matrix.org/blog/2019/09/27/privacy-improvements-in-synapse-1-4-and-riot-1-4/
minus-squaressm@lemmy.sdf.orgOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoRead the research paper on Matrix’ privacy then, and make your own judgements.
minus-squarekbal@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up0·4 months agoToo old (it’s from 2019) and too tendetious in tone; didn’t read. For both reasons it seems certain that it does not tell the whole story.
Somehow this article is full of “We didn’t read it but trust us …”
Literally all their issues were addressed by the very document they claimed wasn’t worth reading yet they linked to anyway… That was in 2019. So they solved this persons complaints five years ago.
https://www.matrix.org/blog/2019/09/27/privacy-improvements-in-synapse-1-4-and-riot-1-4/
Read the research paper on Matrix’ privacy then, and make your own judgements.
Too old (it’s from 2019) and too tendetious in tone; didn’t read. For both reasons it seems certain that it does not tell the whole story.