Here's yet another reason why Signal should NOT be held up as the standard for secure and/or private comms.
@voltronic I'm a big fan of Signal so maybe a bit biased here, but I believe this is simply b/c the quote of a previous message is an entirely separate copy & will always adhere to the setting of the new disappearing message timer. They're probably ways around this, but I would imagine it becomes exceedingly complex, requiring some remnant of the disappeared message to enforce the quote disappearing which could introduce bugs, or worse security vulnerabilities, in future updates.
@nova
This doesn't seem to complex to me. I'm pretty sure that on Twitter, when someone quote-tweets and the original is deleted, the quoted message is replaced with a message stating that it was deleted by the author. Now, we know that Twitter doesn't *actually* delete messages from their servers, but if they *did* (like on CoSo) then that would take care of it.
Signal is a centralized messenger, so I don't see why they couldn't use a similar implementation.
@voltronic out of a desire to double check I decided to test this on my note-to-self chat. Perhaps they could implement a feature where regardless of the disappearing message setting anything that's quoted inherits the disappearing message timer of what's being quoted rather than the new setting. Something quoted could still be visible after the fact but only for the same amount of time as the quoted message.
