Signal is not fully open source and thus impossible to decentralize. Hence there is a single entity to attack. Why not use keet instead.
Maybe we can all 'live without' private messaging?
Pay attention.
Denmark is set to take over the rotating EU Council presidency.
And is sending signals that they want to go after encryption.
Backdoors end badly.
Demanding backdoors isn't just surest way to chase away innovation...it's collective punishment for security services' own failures to adapt.
And the history of democracies is littered with states abusing secret surveillance powers to undermine core values.
Article: https://www.politico.eu/article/encryption-crime-denmark-peter-hummelgaard-europe-privacy/
Discussion
Which part of Signal is not open source?
server
Agreed it's better if the server is open source, but as long as the client is open source and created the private key to sign the messages and client side encrypts the messages, there's little need to worry other than the Metadata that goes with it. When the message goes out, one needs to assume any relay or packet sniffer will attempt to read it, including the Signal server. But ideally everything is open source so we can see what it's doing with the metadata rather than trusting it.
their centralized server can be shut down with the stroke of a pen. even open sourcing signal server wont do much good either, because its not built to be decentralized. there are alternatives: https://simplex.chat