• 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Having Signal fill in gaps for what the OS should be protecting is just going to stretch Signal more than it already does. I would agree that if Signal can properly support that kind of protection on EVERY OS that its built for, go for it. But this should be an OS level protection that can be offered to Signal as an app, not the other way around.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Having Signal fill in gaps for what the OS should be protecting is just going to stretch Signal more than it already does. I would agree that if Signal can properly support that kind of protection on EVERY OS that its built for, go for it. But this should be an OS level protection that can be offered to Signal as an app, not the other way around.

      Damn reading literacy has gone downhill these days.

      Please reread my post.

      But this should be an OS level protection that can be offered to Signal as an app, not the other way around.

      1. OSs provide keyring features already
      2. The framework signal uses (electron) has a built in API for this EXACT NEED

      Cmon, you can do better than this, this is just embarrassing.