I just use Beeper. I had my own Matrix server up but getting all the bridges to work was cumbersome.
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
6 points (75.0% liked)
Selfhosted
39931 readers
463 users here now
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam posting.
-
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Hmmm how is Beeper? Isn't it run on someone's Mac instead of your own? Is it FOSS?
Beeper's software stack is partly open source. They develop the mautrix bridges for WhatsApp, Signal, Discord and many more as open source.
What they keep closed source is their clients (and probably infrastructure).
The documentation to host their bridges is great [1] and the bridges works with most server implementaions (I know of Synapse, Dendrite & Conduit).
I'm running signal and whatsapp bridges for years now without problems, but it's definitely simpler to pay for Beeper.
The problem with these bridges is that they have to decrypt messages and encrypt them again with matrix. This means anyone who controls the server running bridges has access to your messages. Self-hosting means I'm still in control of my data.
I set up AirMessage, and it is very glitchy. I can't message some people because I get an error every time. You need to own a Mac to set it up, and it needs to always be awake. So if you have a laptop, it doesn't really work. There is an option to give your apple login info to a third party, and they will run it on their Mac, but I don't trust that at all.
Nah. Fuck em. I don't need iMessage.
Agreed. However, iMessage is better than sms. And I am trying my best to remove sms from my life
Signal
Again agreed, however some people either won't switch, or it would be more convenient to just use iMessage
Well yea, any IP-based messenger is better than SMS. iMessage is just Apple's implementation which only works with Apple devices.
Seems to me the people who have a comm issue are the ones choosing to use a messenger that only works on one platform.
I'm not on that platform, and neither is ~80% of the world.
It's mostly a north american problem as far as I know. In Germany more than 80% of the people use WhatsApp. Almost no one uses sms anymore.
If the alternative is sms I understand why people like iMessage so much.
Edit: Some more data, it seems like iMessage has about as many users as Signal, according to https://www.statista.com/statistics/867539/top-active-social-media-platforms-in-germany/
Wow, as many users as signal. Thats an interesting stat.
I like the idea of iMessage. It makes sense - default to a proper, encrypted messaging system while allowing for SMS.
Signal dropping SMS support is just so confusing. Keep SMS until many people have converted. You can always remove SMS later when it finally fades away.
Signal dropping SMS support is just so confusing. Keep SMS until many people have converted. You can always remove SMS later when it finally fades away.
SMS support was dropped because people were using Signal thinking their conversations were encrypted and it was only through unencrypted SMS. It's hard to sell the privacy part of Signal when it's not actually guaranteed, so they got rid of that.
I've heard this argument before and it's bunk.
Signal made it very clear when a message was unencrypted. And if that was really an issue, make the indicator more clear/obvious.
How many users of Signal lacked the ability to know this, especially since any less-technical people were likely using Signal because someone like us got them to, so we would be explaining the difference, as getting people to use the encryption is our goal.
Also, how would Signal know this issue? Were they monitoring users?
It really sounds like a non-reason. It doesn't add up.
It’s been on my agenda for a while to set up a Matrix server with an iMessage bridge with the idea I could interact with all of my message protocols from one place. I haven’t gotten around to it, but it might be worth a look.
Biuebubbles is based. I was running on an old Mac mini then switched to a vm on my server (spoofing the hw info from the Mac mini) for Ventura + lower power consumption.
I use an old iphone to link my phone number, but will eventually switch to pypush as a way or registering without the iPhone