Signal is secure, as proven by hackers
Whatever the security of Signal is, all my trust into any service ends when it requires from me personally identifiable information, which could be easely replaced by other methods (I am system software developer for ~31 years, don't even try to feed me with bs).<p>And as such, Signal/Telegram/Whatever that requires me to enter phone number, has zero trust from me. I don't care who analyzed the protocols security, what the safety measures are, what cipher algorithms you use, how many hackers tried to break in and failed, what other PR/SEO methods you use.<p>Just the fact, that you require information that is so deeply PII as phone number is a reason that overrides everything else. From my standpoint, software that requires that, is honeypot.<p>(btw, this is my personal opinion, you don't have to agree - I can (from any device, without giving any PII, now or 20 years in past) login into IRC network (vpn/... is outside this topic) and use asymmetric cryptography (with exchanging public key safely by some other method, stenography anyone?) to chat completely secure. I can send email (with exchanging public key safely by some other method, stenography anyone?) and communicate completely secure. I can use Counterstrike chat on random server to do the same. So what does the Signal does for me in terms of safety of exchanged information? Show me a nicer UI so I can use graphic smileys?)