8. Comparing Secure Messaging Protocols: Signal vs.
WhatsApp
Abstract
With the growing reliance on messaging platforms for communication, security and privacy have
become critical concerns for users. This study compares the Signal and WhatsApp messaging
protocols, focusing on their architecture, security measures, features, and potential vulnerabilities.
Signal, widely regarded as the gold standard for secure communication, is compared against
WhatsApp, which employs the Signal Protocol but integrates additional features. The analysis
identifies both similarities and differences in their approaches to encryption, user experience, and
potential risks.
1. Introduction
Secure messaging protocols are the backbone of modern communication platforms. Signal and
WhatsApp are two prominent platforms offering end-to-end encryption (E2EE). Signal prioritizes
privacy and transparency, while WhatsApp blends secure communication with broader usability and
integration into Meta's ecosystem.
This study aims to compare these platforms across multiple metrics, highlighting their strengths,
limitations, and suitability for various user needs.
2. Comparative Overview
General Feature Comparison:
| Metric | Signal | WhatsApp |
|------------------------|---------------------|---------------------|
| Year of Launch | 2014 | 2009 |
| User Base | ~100 million | Over 2 billion |
| Parent Organization | Open Whisper Systems (Non-profit) | Meta (Facebook) |
| Primary Focus | Privacy and Security | Usability with Security |
| Cross-Platform Support | Android, iOS, Desktop | Android, iOS, Desktop |
3. Security Protocol Comparison
| Security Aspect | Signal | WhatsApp |
|------------------------|-------------------|--------------------|
| Encryption Type | End-to-End (Signal Protocol) | End-to-End (Signal Protocol) |
| Algorithm | Curve25519, AES-256, HMAC-SHA256 | Curve25519, AES-256,
HMAC-SHA256 |
| Key Management | Ephemeral keys for each message/session | Ephemeral keys for each
message/session |
| Backup Encryption | Enabled by default | Introduced in 2021, optional for users |
| Forward Secrecy | Fully implemented | Fully implemented |
| Metadata Privacy | Minimal metadata stored | Metadata collected and shared with Meta |
| Transparency | Fully open-source | Encryption open-source, infrastructure proprietary |
4. Features and Usability Comparison
| Feature | Signal | WhatsApp |
|------------------------|-------------------|--------------------|
| Group Chats | Supported with smaller participant limits | Supported with large group limits |
| Multimedia Sharing | Supported | Supported |
| Status Updates | Not available | Available |
| Backup Options | Cloud or local, encrypted | Cloud or local, not encrypted by default |
| Two-Step Verification | Available | Available |
| Biometric Lock | Supported | Supported |
| Customizations | Limited | Extensive (wallpapers, themes, etc.) |
5. Privacy and Metadata Comparison
| Privacy Aspect | Signal | WhatsApp |
|------------------------|-------------------|--------------------|
| User Data Collection | No data collection | Metadata collected for service improvement |
| Third-Party Sharing | None | Shares some data with Meta |
| Contact Syncing | Optional | Mandatory |
| Message Logs | Not stored | Not stored |
| Backup Risks | Encrypted | Vulnerable if not encrypted |
...
Conclusion
Signal and WhatsApp both deliver secure messaging solutions based on the Signal Protocol.
However, their approaches diverge significantly. Signal is a privacy-first platform with minimal
features but maximum transparency, making it ideal for privacy-conscious users. WhatsApp, while
secure in terms of message encryption, compromises user privacy with metadata collection and
proprietary features. Ultimately, the choice between the two depends on user priorities, balancing
privacy, functionality, and usability.
