Live data from Hacker News

Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

androidpolice.com

31–40 of 81 posts

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#31

It doesn't actually even matter if they did this. The only thing that matters is that they are physically capable of doing so. Telegram is not e2e encrypted by default, and therefore you shouldn't use it if you're concerned about privacy. Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date.…

It absolutely matters that they did this. We can’t ever trust them again

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#32
post #9

I love Telegram, but it is one of those apps that since it requires a phone number I don't really trust them with ultra-secret data. I think their E2E protocol is fairly sound, but even that isn't ideal. I think you may also get some minimum benefit by using the open-source Android app vs the Google Play Store app. Regardless, if you really desire secrecy (and I believe in privacy but would never advocate for serious…

Signal also requires a phone number, IIRC

So does Telegram, last time I checked?

I always found it funny - here's a privacy focused alternative to Whatsapp! But we'll need your phone number, first. Why? Oh, y'know, to limit spam and stuff. 'cuz that definitely can't be done any other way.

Sure, I can get prepaid cards. Or I can just use Whatsapp. If I do anything illegal, I can do better than Telegram.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#33
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, a significant flaw, however, it's not that difficult to source a disposable phone number.

That very much varies with country. Most countries I’m familiar with the rules for require ID when buying pre-pay SIM cards these days.

A prepaid SIM having the same security checks as a bank account definitely felt sour. And for some reason people think they have any privacy from the government.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#34

It doesn't actually even matter if they did this. The only thing that matters is that they are physically capable of doing so. Telegram is not e2e encrypted by default, and therefore you shouldn't use it if you're concerned about privacy. Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date.…

It absolutely matters that they did this. We can’t ever trust them again

Not really. Nobody should have trusted them in the first place.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#35
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrible advice. If you want e2e you can choose to enable it. It is not enabled because many users choose to receive their messages across multiple personal devices simultaneously. This is not possible with e2e, which is why it is an option.

> Terrible advice. If you want e2e you can choose to enable it. It is not enabled because many users choose to receive their messages across multiple personal devices simultaneously. This is not possible with e2e, which is why it is an option. Signal, WhatsApp, iMessage and Threema seem to do just fine.

> iMessage

Unrelated to this, but for all intents and purposes, iMessage cannot be considered e2e encrypted if either party has iCloud backups enabled. Apple has access to your iCloud backups, and they contain the iMessage keys.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#36

People use Telegram because they have a great user experience. Signal, unfortunately, does not - and it's not entirely because they're limited by E2EE.

99% of people i know using Telegram is for piracy stuffs, not the actual chat but i guess it's different in other countries.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#37
post #22

It doesn't actually even matter if they did this. The only thing that matters is that they are physically capable of doing so. Telegram is not e2e encrypted by default, and therefore you shouldn't use it if you're concerned about privacy. Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date.…

> Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date. https://signal.org/bigbrother/eastern-virginia-grand-jury/ Signal's subpoenas have always left a sour taste in my mouth. I just can't believe that they are getting so few, at least some cases they'll just send the standard letter out and…

Not to mention that cryptocoin integration attempt to cash out with privacy reputation. It just left so sour taste as well. What else they are ready to do?

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#38
post #22

It doesn't actually even matter if they did this. The only thing that matters is that they are physically capable of doing so. Telegram is not e2e encrypted by default, and therefore you shouldn't use it if you're concerned about privacy. Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date.…

> Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date. https://signal.org/bigbrother/eastern-virginia-grand-jury/ Signal's subpoenas have always left a sour taste in my mouth. I just can't believe that they are getting so few, at least some cases they'll just send the standard letter out and…

> Signal has a push token for the vast majority of accounts otherwise they wouldn't be able to send out push notifications on iOS

It's technically possible for them to not know which phone numbers correspond to which devices and tokens.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#39
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrible advice. If you want e2e you can choose to enable it. It is not enabled because many users choose to receive their messages across multiple personal devices simultaneously. This is not possible with e2e, which is why it is an option.

> Terrible advice. If you want e2e you can choose to enable it. It is not enabled because many users choose to receive their messages across multiple personal devices simultaneously. This is not possible with e2e, which is why it is an option. Signal, WhatsApp, iMessage and Threema seem to do just fine.

"Just fine" by conveniently managing the keys for you. You have no idea what they really do with them.

Well, except Threema. Last time I used it, it was not possible to receive their messages across multiple devices simultaneously.

Re: Telegram reportedly surrendered user data to authorities

#40

It doesn't actually even matter if they did this. The only thing that matters is that they are physically capable of doing so. Telegram is not e2e encrypted by default, and therefore you shouldn't use it if you're concerned about privacy. Look no further than Signal's supboenas and how they respond to them. With all the information they hold about an account. Which is just the creation date and last connection date.…

Terrible advice. If you want e2e you can choose to enable it. It is not enabled because many users choose to receive their messages across multiple personal devices simultaneously. This is not possible with e2e, which is why it is an option.

> This is not possible with e2e

Why not? You can encrypt a message with more than one key, no? It’s still e2e, just that there are multiple ends.

Apple’s Messages is e2e (until SMS is used) and they have group chats.

Post reply on HN