“Signal is being blocked in Venezuela and Russia. The app is a popular choice for encrypted messaging and people trying to avoid government censorship, and the blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries…”

  • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Peer to peer apps do not work without a centralized relay to get you around the CG-Nat that cellphones live behind. So they’re not really peer to peer. You would be playing whack-a-mole with the relays, having to spin them up as they get blocked. Many ISPs implement CG-NAT as well. Its really dependent on how the network providers structure things. Someone from the country with local knowledge would have to test it.

    • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      IPv6 doesn’t need CGNAT. So as long as it’s capable of doing IPv6, it can directly communicate peer to peer using globally unique addresses. How do I know this? Simple because my ISP on IPv4 is completely CGNAT and I cannot get anything past it. So I am completely forced to use IPv6 for any service I want to run and access from outside my network.

      • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sure, but ipv6 is not widely adopted. I’m behind a CG-NAT but can’t get an ipv6 so I have to operate a vps bridge to host my services. Some cell networks have ipv6 support but a few implement a NAT for it as well. AT&T only allows port 80 and 443.

        Its not consistent enough to be useful without a centralized relay.

        • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I think that really depends on where you are. Here in the US, for example, IPv6 is pretty darn well adopted. And even 45% of Google’s internet traffic is done over IPv6.

          • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            Sure but if your looking to use a chat service, 45% is not a high enough watermark to have reliability. Its so contingent on the network operator to allow for an IPV6 connection. And like I said, places like AT&T have a NAT on their IPV6 network.

            • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              True, the only other option is something like simplex through tor. There are also p2p options like meshtastic as well.

    • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      IPv6 doesn’t need CGnet. So as long as it’s capable of doing IPv6, it can directly communicate peer to peer using globally unique addresses. How do I know this? Simple because my ISP on IPv4 is completely CG NAT and I cannot get anything past it. So I am completely forced to use IPv6 for any service I want to run and access from outside my network.