{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreifu7qavpnvhnhnprmk6pdzgbt6mokrfuyuwiuoo63ldba4nrkswky",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mpuajbbjao52"
  },
  "path": "/t/a-third-party-breached-the-intercept-s-signal-tip-line-and-has-been-soliciting-whistleblowers/38973#post_10",
  "publishedAt": "2026-07-04T23:13:55.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "textContent": "notwithstanding:\n\n> On ownership, it seems a bit ridiculous to me that you would feel “ownership” (in the property sense, as in, “this is mine forever”) over an account (or in this case, just a username) that exists in someone else’s database.\n\nWhen I said “ownership” I meant control over the account, not ownership in the property sense.\n\nnotwithstanding:\n\n> Even email services eventually turn over their inactive addresses.\n\nIt would be good to examine Signal’s ToS wrt inactive accounts. If it states nothing about inactive accounts/usernames, users may expect to maintain ownership (control) over them indefinitely. If the ToS states inactive accounts/usernames are deactivated, a balance between security and recycling accounts/usernames would be prudent. AFAIK some email services are smart enough to freeze used email addresses after they have been deactivated.",
  "title": "A Third Party Breached The Intercept’s Signal Tip Line and Has Been Soliciting Whistleblowers"
}