Slashdot Mirror


Are Your Slack Conversations Really Private and Secure? (fastcompany.com)

An anonymous reader writes: "Chats that seem to be more ephemeral than email are still being recorded on a server somewhere," reports Fast Company, noting that Slack's Data Request Policy says the company will turn over data from customers when "it is compelled by law to do so or is subject to a valid and binding order of a governmental or regulatory body...or in cases of emergency to avoid death or physical harm to individuals." Slack will notify customers before disclosure "unless Slack is prohibited from doing so," or if the data is associated with "illegal conduct or risk of harm to people or property."

The article also warns that like HipChat and Campfire, Slack "is encrypted only at rest and in transit," though a Slack spokesperson says they "may evaluate" end-to-end encryption at some point in the future. Slack has no plans to offer local hosting of Slack data, but if employers pay for a Plus Plan, they're able to access private conversations.

Though Slack has 4 million users, the article points out that there's other alternatives like Semaphor and open source choices like Wickr and Mattermost. I'd be curious to hear what Slashdot readers are using at their own workplaces -- and how they feel about the privacy and security of Slack?

68 comments

  1. Running an internal Jabber server here by Kargan · · Score: 1

    It's only accessible over the intranet, so no privacy worries here (at least from 3rd parties -- I know that management reviews chat logs periodically, as is their right).

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
    1. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If management gets to review my chat logs, I should damn right be able to review theirs.

    2. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by OzPeter · · Score: 2

      If management gets to review my chat logs, I should damn right be able to review theirs.

      Remind me again who employs who?

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Management isn't employing anyone. The company is. Managers are employees as well.

    4. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by OzPeter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Management isn't employing anyone. The company is. Managers are employees as well.

      Ah I see. Willful ignorance in order to try and make a point.

      Now remind me again who employs who and (the bit you are deliberately ignoring) creates this thing called a hierarchy (you're heard of them haven't you?) and grants people at different levels of said hierarchy different responsibilities and powers.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    5. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      Indeed. One of my favorite ways to rapidly escalate a roadside interview is to agree to a search of my vehicle if the officer allows me to search his, as well.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    6. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Why?

    7. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now remind me again who employs who and (the bit you are deliberately ignoring) creates this thing called a hierarchy (you're heard of them haven't you?) and grants people at different levels of said hierarchy different responsibilities and powers.

      ...Canada? Final answer.

    8. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by molarmass192 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'll have to try this. I've always wondered what it feels like to get tasered and clubbed over the head with a flashlight.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    9. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jabber is fine if everyone is on the intranet. Thats about where it ends.

      We moved from Jabber to Slack 3 years ago. We have remote offices all over the place not one VPN tunnels, we have 2FA enabled and a 3 month retention policy for chats and files. We also make use of a number of things that integrate with Slack, and lastly the channels are great when structured correctly for teams and departments.

      Most of our communications is done over Slack, email is that thing we keep around for things dont integrate with Slack, and more official company communications.

    10. Re: Running an internal Jabber server here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But even with an internal jabber server that logs everything, you can still use OTR for end-to-end client encryption.

      Group charts public, individual chats private.

    11. Re:Running an internal Jabber server here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might get a chance to check out the back seat area.

  2. Short answer: by bravecanadian · · Score: 1

    No.

    1. Re:Short answer: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What has Slackware got to do with conversations?

  3. we have slack at work, and I don't understand why by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am from the era where 'net news' (nntp) was popular.

    for a few years, I was at SGI and they were HUGE into nntp. in fact, one of the most memorable ones was 'sgi.ba' and ba stood for 'bad attitude' (seriously). first day there, getting the HR orientation, they told us all about the usenet hier at work and how its GOOD to be aware of, and reading, sgi.ba. you'd hear about complaints but also the reasons behind them. HR was ok with that! those were the cool days in silicon valley, when it was still fun to live and work here, and companies were still pretty fun to work for.

    anyway, I never understood what's wrong with usenet for internal threaded and persistent chats? you WANT it to stay around so you can find out the reasons for why this or that design was done. its part of the company history. but slack, unless you pay, fades away. how stupid! and yet, when I asked for nntp at work instead of slack, no one seemed to even KNOW what nntp was and to this day, they have no plans to implement it.

    'chat' programs seem the most useless things; fully redundant to the MANY other forms of e-communication that we ALREADY have.

    when usenet mostly 'ended' and web forums took over, I was sad. seems we continue to throw out old, free, WORKING tools for newfangled OH SHINEY! bullshit.

    I don't get it. I really don't.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  4. Are Your Slack Conversations Really Private? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's not what concerns me. What concerns me is that my private conversations are really slack.

  5. Schneier's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the Internet, nothing is certain except for surveillance, hacking, spam, and trolls.

    (actually Bruce didn't say that, but it's customary to try to sell these epigrams by attributing it to a famous person).

  6. those who ignore IRC by nimbius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are doomed to reinvent it, poorly. IRC has had end to end TLS and EECDH cryptography for quite some time. it even boasts key based authentication. This is the opinion of a Greybeard, so hold on for a rant. I dont think "chat-ops" brings anything to the table we havent had for 3 decades already. its a nice buzzword for startups to throw around when touting their agile workplaces.

    Do one thing, and do it well. If im chatting with you, i dont need to see your face or hear your voice. Asterisk lets me place a call to you if its really that necessary but video conferencing is just compensating for managements insecurity. if you want to show me your code, send me a link to your gitlab or pastebin or gerrit (we have pull requests you know.) if you need to share your screen, tmux and novnc do it just fine but you should take a moment to determine why your screen has to be shared for me to understand a particular concept or issue. So in short, no. I dont see value in slack and mattermost. I dont want another goddamn client on my desktop and i dont need another website that loads 50mb of content just to make sure my manager can see my living room.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:those who ignore IRC by davidwr · · Score: 2

      Do one thing, and do it well.

      If that one thing is "communicate," well, then that "one thing" may encompass sharing screens, sharing code, sharing text, sharing audio, sharing video, etc. etc. etc. or at the very least, calling some under-the-hood program to do those things for you while the user perceives it as "one seamless thing."

      If that "one thing" is "texting" then that "one thing" may include getting typed input from the user, determining who the recipient is, determining how to send it to the recipient, sending it, receiving data from someone else, displaying it on the screen, or at the very least, calling some under-the-hood program to do those things for you while the user perceives it as "one seamless thing."

      Now, you and those you communicate with may communicate more efficiently using a "text only" medium most of the time, but not every team does. Some teams actually communicate better using a seamlessly-integrated multi-media communications tool that has audio, video, screen-sharing, file-sharing, etc. If that tool happens to use IRC protocols, VNC protocols, gitlib, pastebin, etc., under the hood or if it is using some other technology, the people who are participating in the conversation don't care nor should they have to.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    2. Re:those who ignore IRC by murdocj · · Score: 1

      What if I want to do all those things (talk, chat, share screens, share files) w/o having to configure 15 different programs and figure out to get each one thru the firewalls? What if I just want to click the "share screen" button and have it, you know, work?

      I use skype, and whatever I need to do, it just plain works. That's what I want. Not 15 obscure programs to configure, update, and have break.

    3. Re:those who ignore IRC by murdocj · · Score: 2

      I'll agree with one thing, I don't want webcam video. We had our daily standups via hipchat and I just left my webcam off. People know what I look like, they don't need to see me grimacing as they lay out absurd schedules.

    4. Re:those who ignore IRC by flacco · · Score: 1

      > video conferencing is just compensating for managements insecurity

      I would have agreed with you until recently, when I started collaborating on a creative project with a non-technical friend. He was really in favor of occasional video conferencing, so we've been doing that, and it really has added an important dimension to our work.

      I prefer to self-host whenever possible, so while we conduct much of our communication via a Mattermost instance, I would really like to ditch Google Hangouts for something I can host myself too, and works well on Linux (me) and Mac (him).

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    5. Re:those who ignore IRC by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      greynecks know, we had dozens of solutions for this before they even implemented this featureless proprietary pap!

    6. Re:those who ignore IRC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if they saw your reactions maybe they would think that people think their schedules are absurd...

      Feedback can be important.

    7. Re:those who ignore IRC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are doomed to reinvent it, poorly. IRC has had end to end TLS and EECDH cryptography for quite some time. it even boasts key based authentication. This is the opinion of a Greybeard, so hold on for a rant. I dont think "chat-ops" brings anything to the table we havent had for 3 decades already. its a nice buzzword for startups to throw around when touting their agile workplaces.

      Do one thing, and do it well. If im chatting with you, i dont need to see your face or hear your voice. Asterisk lets me place a call to you if its really that necessary but video conferencing is just compensating for managements insecurity. if you want to show me your code, send me a link to your gitlab or pastebin or gerrit (we have pull requests you know.) if you need to share your screen, tmux and novnc do it just fine but you should take a moment to determine why your screen has to be shared for me to understand a particular concept or issue. So in short, no. I dont see value in slack and mattermost. I dont want another goddamn client on my desktop and i dont need another website that loads 50mb of content just to make sure my manager can see my living room.

      wow, that sounds impressive. can you install all those things on my computer? i already have the internet installed, so the rest of that stuff should be easy peasy. and, i assume you'll be available later in case i have any questions?

    8. Re:those who ignore IRC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish Slack (and so many other) people could get this through their heads.

  7. Wait, people thought they were secure? by hsmith · · Score: 2

    Slack has no end-to-end crypto - it isn't generating keypairs for messages on an individual basis - so what idiot thought that the conversations could be private? You can download and search prior messages - indicating that - duh - anyone could do so.

    1. Re:Wait, people thought they were secure? by davidwr · · Score: 2

      Slack may not have end-to-end crypto, but there is nothing technical stopping me and the person I am taking to from using a Secret Decoder Ring or for that matter, a one-time pad, to encrypt our messages.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  8. Hipster fucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you WANT it to stay around

    Except they don't.

    They throw shitfits because their communications - on software paid for by their company, run on hardware paid for by their company, during hours they're being paid by their company - might be monitored!

    Trying to get useful archives out of Slack is absurd.

  9. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by slashrio · · Score: 1

    It wasn't only working, it also 'was' (surprise: It still is) structured and hierarchical, so you didn't have to live in uncertainty whether your search engine had found all the forums that covered the topic you're interested in.
    Another example of stupidity if you ask me.

    --
    "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  10. Simple answer... by c · · Score: 1

    Are your conversations on the Internet? Then no, they aren't private or secure.

    I could be wrong, but I doubt many smart people would bet on it.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
    1. Re:Simple answer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm...

      -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
      owGbwMvMwCQodP7LEW3LF2GMp8W
      ZGJgY2WK2MTKzMDFKQDTc+0cw1y
      02SbOMJ+0JyzpyK0jr71E3QA=
      =SBr5
      -----END PGP MESSAGE-----

  11. Mattermost by revjtanton · · Score: 2

    I just put up a Mattermost server this week to replace Slack for my family messaging. I chose it over Jabber or IRC because the features it sports are a little friendlier to the less-tech-savy or younger (6 year old) user. The traffic is encrypted with my own cert, and the box is my own (physical, not AWS or anything) and it's encrypted. I know that to use push notifications on mobile you have to allow the notification to route through their services, but you can limit the info to simply be "person has sent you a message". From what I could see in my research Mattermost seemed like it was private, easy, and had some nice features. I'd recommend it...unless of course I missed something on the privacy side...

    1. Re:Mattermost by flacco · · Score: 1

      We have Slack at work. I recently set up a Mattermost instance for a personal project. Very much a work-alike - and of course can be self-hosted.

      Though I didn't use it, Mattermost has an "omnibus" install that encapsulates pretty much everything requires to run it - web server, database server, etc.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    2. Re:Mattermost by revjtanton · · Score: 1

      Yeah I saw the Docker stuff but decided to set it up myself end to end because I use that server for a few other things internally, and I wasn't sure how the packaged solution would work with that. Overall I was pleased with the simplicity of setting it up. The only curveball I had to overcome was using apache (so as not to interfere with other working things) and my own cert. Reverse proxy to feed traffic back to the default Mattermost port and easy peasy.

  12. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by mea2214 · · Score: 1

    The main problem with Usenet is the client side readers are old and clunky. Back in the day working in a terminal shell was more common.

  13. Industrial espionage by NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you use an American product, assume they have all your files and data, and if your project is critical to your mission and success in your market, simply change to Mattermost instead.

  14. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by lannocc · · Score: 1

    Hierarchies and structure are too much for the WWW hipsterNet. The DNS will continue to flatten, databases have no schema, and AI will be required to make sense of any of it.

  15. rofl.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what is slack? or is this an ad? why abp didn't block dammit...

  16. What is slack? by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And why should I use it in place of email or the telephone?

    1. Re:What is slack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One reason would be to prioritize your communication. You give your email and telephone to everyone, there mothers, and the spam bots. But Slack is only allowing communication with your team. Because this reduces spam/third party it makes a great way to communicate quickly and easily. (Without fighting through spam and vendors and random others emails.) For telephone - Slack is less disruptive than calling someone, but still gets the message delivered quickly and allows quick responses.

    2. Re:What is slack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same reason you should use google instead of demanding that people spoon-feed you baseline geek knowledge.

    3. Re:What is slack? by aklinux · · Score: 2

      And why should I use it in place of email or the telephone?

      Because keeping up with a dozen team members in geographically, time zone and time schedule diverse places is a pain. More than once I have ended up working with instructions or a document that had been superseded and I was unaware of the fact that it had been superseded.

      You end up in a situation with a dozen people hitting "reply all" or calling each other on the telephone leaving messages. While you're listening to one message or talking to one person, three others call and leave more messages and sending emails in between.

      Maybe Slack isn't "The" answer, maybe it still needs some work, but it's a step in the right direction.

    4. Re:What is slack? by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Ah. So you want a widget to solve a problem in management style. Yeah. And I've got some real estate off the coast of Florida to sell you.

    5. Re:What is slack? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 0

      Slack is a communications program useful for people who aren't bigots and better-than-thou shit heads who go by stupid pseudonyms, such as RightwingNutjob.

  17. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Some of the archived threads in groups like comp.lang.c++ are still worth the read.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  18. slack is for losers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do you use slack? Yes? You're a loser. Man up and use IRC.

  19. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The main problem with Usenet is the client side readers are old and clunky.

    If by "old and clunky" you mean "work dramatically better than web browsers on modern web forums", then yes!

    With client side readers, for starters you can pick which one you want, instead of the web forum software deciding what features you may or may not have for its forums. They handled threaded conversations well, which only some web forums do. They supported local kill files. You could easily sort and search locally by any criteria you wanted, with none of the bullshit restrictions web forums often have such as "no searching for less than 4 character strings". Everything was organized in a semi-well constructed hierarchy, rather than being spewed around 6030945 different little forums. You'd have the same reader interface to everything, rather than each web forum supplying its own "look and feel" with different sets of capabilities. You didn't have to sign up separately for every one you wanted to use.

    Web forums were a big step back in capability and ease of use.

  20. Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slack is a centralized, closed service. Why would anyone think data shared with a 3rd party is private or secure, unless you personally encrypted it first? But hey, as long as you get to use emojis in chat, it's all good I guess.

  21. Reporters need to get computer literate by rakslice · · Score: 1

    That was my reaction too: it's not too difficult to notice that the search in Slack is searching chat messages that you have never seen locally, is it? What's more, this feature is not unusual among HipChat clones... Even Discord just launched search.

    I'm not sure who the misunderstanding belongs to -- the people at Fast Company reporting the story as it is at the Gawker people the story was about.

    Reporters need to get computer literate... and then hopefully go beyond that to become involved in choosing products that do what they need them to do.

    Reporters need to realize that understanding the features of a software product can mostly be done by using it, and paying attention to what is happening and figuring out why.

    There is a lot of discussion in the security blogosphere about the security of various messaging platforms that are trying to focus on actual security features, and while there is value in the details that they are hashing out, just knowing what software they are talking about is better than sticking your head in the sand.

  22. Slack and GitHub Both are backed by Jared Kushner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slack and GitHub Both are backed by Jared Kushner's VC firm and both should be considered tools of the Republican Trump Administration at this point.

    Thrive Capital is a major backer of both:

    https://www.crunchbase.com/org...

    https://www.crunchbase.com/org...

    https://www.crunchbase.com/org...

  23. Use a Tox client by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 2

    A Tox client uses Tox servers to direct traffic and then I think it's p2p from there. The connections are encrypted and Tox clients are open source. Plus, it supports text, audio, and video calling, as well as file sharing. And after you create a profile, which stays on your desktop so no data stays on any server, you can share that profile to your other computers and devices with Tox clients and "sign in" that way. It's a lot like sharing an OpenVPN settings profile, but for Tox. Most clients have QR code support to because of the really long public address (kind of like PGP key) associated with sharing contact info. -- TheOuterLinux.com

  24. Holy obvious problem Batman by trawg · · Score: 2

    Is there literally ANYONE using Slack that is under any impression that their conversations are private or secure? It's a web-based service that epitomises the phrase "the cloud is someone else's computer".

    If you want private and/or secure conversations, use Signal, or Wire. Or shit, even Whatsapp is probably more secure.

    1. Re:Holy obvious problem Batman by Vegan+Cyclist · · Score: 2

      This. And no, I don't really care if someone snoops and sees that we've ordered x vegan food product, or are short on y vegan food product and need to order more, or checks out the business card design draft I've posted. Slack is easy for our staff to use, which is why we go to it, but we're under no delusion that it's particularly 'secure'. Mundane conversations abound!

  25. Having previously used slack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're setting up mattermost behind a vpn. full stop.

  26. Could be a good idea by fuzzyf · · Score: 1

    IRC and NNTP has a slighty different purpose, IMHO.
    IRC sort of requires online presence when stuff happens, and discussions usually are pretty sequential.
    NNTP could fork of a discussion into different threads.

    Slack is, as you know, basically an IRC overlay with better integration for mobiles and other platforms. We use it at work and it's pretty ok.
    I would love NNTP at work, but not for replacing Slack. I would like it to replace Yammer. Yammer so incredibly inefficient at searching for information.
    So doing the same for NNTP as Slack did for IRC could actually be a good idea. Slick interface for mobile and web and rebranded.

  27. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > you WANT it to stay around so you can find out the reasons for why this or that design was done.

    *puts on his BigCo hat*

    What you don't have, you can't provide in response to a subpoena.

    > seems we continue to throw out old, free, WORKING tools for newfangled OH SHINEY! bullshit.

    Yep. XMPP solved the Instant Messaging walled garden problem of the late 1990's and provided easy, standardized mechanisms to extend the standard so third-party client devs stood a fighting chance of interoperating with your whizz-bang new IM feature. Sadly, there's more short-term monetary and (internal) political profit to be made in creating captive audiences, so XMPP was thrown away and the walled gardens came back.

  28. Re: we have slack at work, and I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Demon Internet had a reader baded on Trumpet Winsock. It was DOS command line USENET browser. It worked in three modes. First one was to download the latest USENET hierarchy. There used to be elections to remove and add new forums. Next was to pick and choose which threads you wanted to download. Third mode was to read those threads and write replies. On a 56K modem, downloading USENET could take an hour.

    There was also regular email which operated in the same way as now.

  29. matrix.org is the answer by alfino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Check out matrix.org. It's a federated, open-standard, rich communication protocol. It can't do everything of Slack and Whatsapp yet, but it's moving along fast and you can help. There are already several clients to choose from, as well as integrations with other networks, APIs, and bot-like tools etc..

    We used it at linux.conf.au 2017 to (inofficially) bridge between Slack and IRC, and had an update of ca. 33% of the conference within 3 days or so, while the number of Slack users went down to a low one-digit figure.

    #matrix on Freenode is bridged to the main discussion room, so pop on over if you want.

    Here's Matthew (one of the project leads) at FOSDEM (with video):
    https://fosdem.org/2017/schedu...
    https://fosdem.org/2017/schedu...

    and my little lightning talk at LCA:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    -- @martinkrafft

    --
    echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
  30. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by jon3k · · Score: 1

    That's kind of like saying nntp is a replacement for irc. It's really not. Slack is really an alternative to irc which for real time text chat. The advantage that Slack (or Mattermost, etc) have over IRC (imo) is it's easily accessible from mobile devices. Sure you can use an IRC client from your phone, but with Slack the mobile client is actually GOOD and you can control notifications well (only alert me on my lock screen if you @me or DM me) and you have persistence. If I open Slack on my phone I can see the current state of the conversation along with all histories. It's also easily searchable. Sure, I do the same thing with tmux and irssi, but doesn't exactly work from my phone and doesn't provide a good system for notifications.

    I really didn't get it until I started using Slack, now I actually really like it. We use it at work and 95% of our communication is via Slack now and everyone loves it. We used to use Jabber (Cisco) and literally every single person is over the moon happy we don't have to use that garbage anymore.

    I used nntp for years, and it was great at the time and if you wanted to make an argument for nntp over forums, I wouldn't put up any fight. But having use Slack for a while as someone who has been a constant IRC user since the mid-90s (on multiple networks), I "get it".

  31. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    Slack also handles multimedia. Even things like formatted code snippets are way up there, in comparison to IRC. Then there's all the integrations with things like JIRA, and you have a client that makes it a lot easier to work with other devs. Who the fuck cares if it's loosely based on IRC? It isn't IRC.

  32. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by jon3k · · Score: 1

    Yeah that's a great point. One of the first things we did was to integrate alerting from our network monitoring systems into Slack. Our inboxes are truly grateful. Also Screenhero is awesome for sharing your desktop, and the built in voice/video chat makes creating a conference call a one click operation.

    Also to your point about multimedia, the ability to paste screenshots directly into slack is great. Being able to just drop things like a PDF into a channel has been really handy.

    Anyone who thinks Slack is just a web based IRC client is totally missing the point.

  33. So many mentions to Mattermost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what about rocket.chat ?

  34. Cisco Spark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We use Spark, built to provide a similar team based persistent chat experience akin to Slack except this tool does have full end to end encryption, including 3rd party integrations and video callin capabilities.

    Here's a white paper

    http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solutions/collateral/collaboration/cloud-collaboration/cisco-spark-security-white-paper.pdf

  35. Re:we have slack at work, and I don't understand w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody disputes this. the article is about how your information is not encrypted end-to-end, meaning Slack themselves have access to your content (meaning it's available to anyone who Slack chooses to share it with).

  36. Cisco Slack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We use Cisco Slack. It has all the team-based persistent chat capabilities of Slack, but benefits from end to end encryption (meaning even Cisco cannot access the content), as well as 3rd party integrations and video calling capabilities.

    Worth a read:

    http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solutions/collateral/collaboration/cloud-collaboration/cisco-spark-security-white-paper.pdf

  37. Better for public or user org chats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It works well for a loosely secured or unsecured chat environment where people of like interests can have sporadic conversations. I would not recommend taking it too seriously, and I certainly would not recommend building business requirements on top of it.