is not rcs simply another locked down standard under the thumb of google, which they have decided to limit and block on rooted devices in the past?
correct me if im wrong ? but this all seems like a freight train of no good barelling in. google propoganda has won out and we’re swapping one gatekept standard for another.
I believe that RCS is a specification maintained by the GSM Association. That’s not to say Google is not a member (they are) and has a strong influence, but Google doesn’t own the standard either
Last I had looked into it, although the standard exists, they use their own servers and are not compatible with other rcs implementations
They are also the only RCS supplier on Android. A random messaging app can’t simply add RCS messaging functionality.
It’s not really much of an open standard at all, in practice.
They are also the only RCS supplier on Android. A random messaging app can’t simply add RCS messaging functionality.
You are correct that an app can’t directly implement RCS but it can support it. RCS is implemented by the carrier, not by Google or any other text application.
RCS is an open standard that any carrier can implement to replace SMS/MMS. The only thing special that Google does is on top of RCS is provides E2E via its own servers for handling messaging. The E2E isn’t a part of RCS, though it should be IMO. Regardless, Google doesn’t ‘own’ the Android implementation because it isn’t a part of Android, other than it can support the carrier’s implementation of RCS.
No app on Android can use RCS yet, other than Google messages.
Not true. Both Samsung and Verizon messages uses RCS, so long as your carrier has implemented RCS.
Samsung had to sign a deal with Google with unknown terms and is Google messages underneath.
Verizon idk, I’m not American.
Any FOSS or privacy friendly implementation?
Samsung messages is just a reskinned google messages
E2EE via server sounds wrong.
Well sure. You’ve got to trust that Jibe isn’t man in the middling the key exchanges but regardless, it doesn’t change what I said.
And just to note, the same is true of iMessage & Apple.
If you didn’t create private and exchange public keys with the other party, you aren’t fully in control. I’m not saying that as some kind of righteous purist, just a technical point of note.
The E2EE element of RCS has basically been a property Google thing, despite all their marketing BS about RCS seeming like some sort of open universal career messaging platform.
Although, allegedly they’ve finally relented and a universal encryption solution is now in the works.
They don’t own the standard, but they own the Android implementation of it. Other RCS implantations are hardcoded to not be supported on Android, with the exception of Samsung’s - and they had to enter an agreement with Google (that we don’t know the terms for) to do that, and even then it’s just the Google implementation under the skin. I guess similar to all iOS browsers being Safari underneath.
It’s not open unless you create your own new operating system and implement it that way.
Google’s implementation also adds a bunch of closed-source extensions on top of the standard.
deleted by creator
Can confirm they block rooted Android users intentionally, completely silently, at least when using Google’s RCS servers. The message just doesn’t send and is automatically deemed spam if you don’t pass PlayIntegrity. And the only RCS capable app is Google’s Messages, third party apps can only access SMS and MMS functionnality.
So yeah, fuck RCS really. I was completely on board with RCS until that. Apple was right on that one. It won’t fix messaging, it just puts it in Google’s hands unless carriers finally decide to roll out real RCS instead of relying on Google to provide it.
Third party apps had that resolved a decade ago, and Signal is just plain better.
You don’t even have to be rooted. RCS won’t work using a non-rooted custom ROM.
But in order to get that ROM you need an unlocked bootloader, breaking integrity (best case scenario is device level integrity, you can’t get strong anymore). Google RCS will sort of work if you can pass Device, but in my experience things break silently if you don’t pass Strong (massively delayed messages, messages not sending, and RCS randomly disabling for no reason at all in the middle of a conversation).
IIRC at least textra is also able to peruse RCS, though I’m sure it goes through google servers too
deleted by creator
I disabled RCS after hearing about this, despite being on an unrooted stock rom. I’ve had a phone suddenly decide to not pass “integrity” 2 years after buying it, despite being not rooted and on stock, it’s not worth the risk of missing text messages.
Moving forward, Google appears to be relenting to Apple, and will be giving up their control over RCS E2EE. Apple and Google are working with the GSMA on a universal standard that is not owned by a single gatekeeper.
That said, for v1 of RCS on iOS, since that universal encryption standard doesn’t exist, RCS will be unencrypted on iOS, allegedly. So, it’s likely to mean that, this fall, iOS to Android is still just as insecure as ever over carrier text messaging, but now images and videos won’t look like shit. Then at some point soon, cross platform messaging will get proper encryption.
We’ll probably need to wait until WWDC before we get more info on what’s actually happening with cross platform RCS.
And it’s still tied to your phone number!
Why would I want another messenger that’s tied to a phone number?
RCS is too little, too late. I’ll never use it.
It’s the natural evolution of SMS. And SMS does what no messaging app does, it lets me send a text message to any mobile number without having to wonder whether the other party has installed the same app as me.
When I make phone calls, it’s between me, the person I’m calling and our carriers. I want it to be the same for text messages.
Sure, the other option is having it tied to an email, which is reliant on your single vendor and is also an easier way to create an army of spam bots. Phone numbers at least are transferable between carriers.
The email vendor doesn’t really matter though unless you are sending or receiving emails. Phone numbers require you to pay a carrier every month. And while most people have phone numbers, some don’t, especially children.
My mum used iMessage to communicate with my sister before she got a phone number. If she switched to Android, I guess there’s Google Chat, but you know how Google is with their chat apps.
Ideally you’d be able to choose between phone number OR email. Like iMessage.
If she switched to Android, I guess there’s Google Chat, but you know how Google is with their chat apps.
That’s far from the only option. I can think of half a dozen relatively mainstream options off the top of my head (Signal, Telegram, Whatsapp, Discord, Matrix, Skype), though I think the first three still want a phone number. There are many more.
The trouble is getting people to agree on one.
Yeah signal, telegram, and whatsapp all want phone numbers I think. And I don’t think I’d be able to convince my mum to use Discord or Matrix. She’d probably end up using something like Facebook Messenger/Messenger Kids
Signal recently updated to allow usernames instead of phone numbers.
I think you still need a phone number though. I think that’s just for if you don’t want to give out your phone number.
Signal is now “phone number to login to the account, but you can share a username with other people”
Not 100% but better than some.
RCS itself is an open standard (kind of), but Google Messages is literally the only RCS Client
There are no others. Like seriously you can barely find another usable RCS Client
sad! the world once again fell for google’s propaganda and deception just because they were able to muster up a good-guy attitude and a winning smile.
the world once again fell for google’s propaganda
Not really — since so far nobody else has adopted RCS. And not many people use the Google one either.
The Signal protocol is a defacto standard and on the path to becoming an actual standard. It’s already the most widely used messaging protocol today except for perhaps Email… but email would only be larger if you include messages that were sent by bots. For human sent messages, Signal is the most widely used protocol in the world.
And as part of the DMA in Europe, Meta (which makes up most Signal users) is opening up their infrastructure so that any other messaging app can send/receive messages to their users. Which would essentially make it a perfect replacement for SMS and definitely better than RCS. You won’t have to use WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger yourself, to be able to securely contact anyone who does.
nobody else has adopted RCS
hm? genuinely does the following not contradict your statement?
Chinese carriers have been proponents of RCS for years, and last year, the Chinese government began the process of codifying into law that to achieve certification, new 5G devices will be required to support RCS. src
like maybe im misunderstanding but seems fairly clear that significant people groups are turning toward RCS.
yeah it’s quite disappointing, I wish Matrix saw some more (individual!) funding
(organisations that have funded Matrix in the past generally want new features, but not core work on Matrix to make the experience any better 🥴)
Damn it I’m included in that :<
They better not obstruct the Linux phones.
Obstruct? No. Not even think about? Yes.
I don’t assume anyone has written a real client yet but there’s a library you can use: https://github.com/Hirohumi/rust-rcs-client
Let’s use a protocol that shadily blocks everything google doesn’t like. Yeah, fuck that.
Right? Google cries about how Apple is so exclusive with their messaging and still pulls the same draconian shit. What a joke
What is this about?
The main RCS benefit is sharing videos between Apple and Android that don’t look like potatoes. Can’t imagine what is being shadily blocked there.
Try using a custom ROM on Android and you’ll quickly see.
As much as they like to pretend RCS is an open standard, it’s really not. In practice, it’s a proprietary protocol to Google Messages. Which the other commenter mentioning custom roms, Google recently blocked platforms that they dont approve of from using RCS.
I still don’t get what’s so great about RCS over SMS/MMS? There’s E2EE but that won’t be in this implementation apparently.
Being able to send pictures and videos without SMS/MMS downscaling them to like 144p (hell I’ve had it be even worse than that for videos sometimes) is incredibly handy. That’s the main benefit for me. Others have commented about the other features. And I’m fairly certain the article did state E2EE will be implemented.
A variety of small but useful features. Typing indicator, reactions, read receipts, and larger media limits. I’m sure there’s more, that’s all I can think of off the top of my head.
You can send rcs messages over Wifi even if you don’t have a cell signal, like iMessage. You can also get iPhone emoji reactions to messages instead of getting a text message saying “X hearted this,” or w/e
SMS has read receipts too. I’m not sure I care about any of the others.
The best that the SMS protocol can tell you is whether the message was delivered and even that isn’t a requirement. SMS has delivery receipts, it does not have read receipts.
Okay.
okay, so, the idea was initially to build something akin to SMS/MMS in the way it’s used but make it more ready for the modern age
just a couple of problems:
- End-To-End-Encryption isn’t officially a part of RCS itself thanks to Telcom companies in the US not being allowed to add that
- Google Messages is literally the only way to use RCS right now.
- It’s “open”-ness is quite disputed due to Google’s control over it
really, we should either be using Matrix, or at the very least build out XMPP into something more modern.
what do you mean Telecoms companies aren’t allowed to add E2EE? there is no such regulation I’m aware of.
besides, how would Apple have been supporting E2EE in iMessage for so long if Telecoms companies weren’t allowed?
could be a motivation issue, but not a regulation issue.
Well for one, iMessage runs over the internet and Apple isn’t a telecom company (Verizon, etc)
Either way, the TL;DR is that either there must be a backdoor or something else to allow law enforcement to access communications that run over telecom companies. This doesn’t apply when a user does it, but definitely when telecom companies design a messaging protocol.
yes I know Apple isn’t a Telecoms company but you need a SIM from a Telecoms company to use iMessage. RCS runs over the Internet too, yet you also need a SIM card for that. Also Telecoms companies aren’t designing message protocols anymore. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.
iMessage can also run over e-mail.
And RCS was designed by the GSMA which is effectively a bunch if telecommunications companies.
Videos that don’t compress to hell when there’s both iOS and Android in a chat, that’s the main feature.
One feature I found extremely useful is that you can now quote previous texts. Less useful is the ability to react to texts with emojis. But it’s good for letting someone know that you saw/liked their message by reacting with a thumbs up.
I have never remembered this when it would actually be useful, and always end up accidentally doing it.
Blue bubbles.
(I’m half joking)
It only has E2EE if you use Google’s proprietary implementation. And even then it’s not the best implementation of E2EE.
There has been some chatter of adding it to the RCS spec, though.
Not that it matters that much, on Android you’re still locked to Google’s RCS API and the same will be true to iOS with Apple’s.
RCS makes everything better by forcing us to add a second proprietary communication standard to our phone that is advertised by Google and required by Chinese law regulations. And is also know for bad security…. What could possibly go wrong.
Does it have end to end encryption like iMessage or WhatsApp? No. The winners and the losers are clear to me.
more like Signal, which is superior to Whatsapp snd iMessage
Isn’t WhatsApp using Signal protocol? Isn’t also iMessage using post quantum computing cryptography like Signal?
I know Signal is superior privacy wise, but is not that used
Public-private key signing, using up to date cryptography. That’s it. It’s also “quantum safe”, because all cryptography used by the public goes through peer review processes.
Microsoft as well as Meta have contracted Whisper Systems, but there’s no way of guaranteeing that the signing process is functionally working or if it’s been broken. If it’s run server side, you have no clue. If it’s run client side, there’s still a question if the process hasn’t been tampered with in some way.
Remember: there is no such thing as cryptography with a backdoor. At that point, it’s just a secrets system.
WhatsApp does use the Signal protocol, but unlike Signal only applies it to Messages, Calls and Status.
Your profile info, who you’re talking to, when you’re using the service, groups you’re in, channels you’re following and much more is left unprotected intentionally.
For instance, Signal sends your profile end-to-end-encrypted instead of leaving it freely accessible on servers.
And then there’s Outlook just being its ancient self.
