Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#1

Post by sultansaladin » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:16 AM UTC

Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
thephonesgsm.blogspot.com

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#2

Post by etiam » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:25 AM UTC

Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#3

Post by sultansaladin » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:26 AM UTC

etiam wrote: post #2

Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.

I have used both, but never heard of Signal I'll try it.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#4

Post by tazjin » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:35 AM UTC

etiam wrote: post #2

Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.

Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync.

The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#5

Post by gtf21 » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:38 AM UTC

tazjin wrote: post #4

etiam wrote: post #2

Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.

Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.

Telegram has the same problem with "Secret Chats" which can only be read on the device from which they are initiated.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#6

Post by Asmod4n » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:41 AM UTC

tazjin wrote: post #4

etiam wrote: post #2

Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.

Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.

multi-device sync means you have to store the private key in the "cloud", or something else which could directly identify you.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#7

Post by tazjin » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:42 AM UTC

gtf21 wrote: post #5

tazjin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.

Telegram has the same problem with "Secret Chats" which can only be read on the device from which they are initiated.

Yes, but the amount of people who actually use secret chats is tiny.

It reminds me a bit of the CAP-theorem: Security, Device Sync and Usability. Pick two.

My personal preference is solving DU, because I can do security aware stuff with GPG.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#8

Post by hamhamed » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:43 AM UTC

When startups say being lucky was a big part of their success..I guess this is what they meant

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#9

Post by tazjin » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:43 AM UTC

Asmod4n wrote: post #6

tazjin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.

multi-device sync means you have to store the private key in the "cloud", or something else which could directly identify you.

No, iMessage for example generates a unique key pair per device and submits your public key to the key pool for your account. Devices can then sync old history using each other's keys and new messages will be encrypted for all devices.

The problem is that the key pool is in Apple's hands. You cannot guarantee that they don't go and add a key do the pool and get all your messages anyways.

Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

#10

Post by izacus » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 10:47 AM UTC

gtf21 wrote: post #5

tazjin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.

Telegram has the same problem with "Secret Chats" which can only be read on the device from which they are initiated.

People don't use Telegram (or whatsapp) for secret chats, but because it's a UX friendly messenger that replaces paid SMS services.