Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 234 posts

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#11

Post by tiagod »

izzytcp wrote: post #3

Hi, German here. How about not storing any information at all? Nothing to give, problem solved. Just like Signal. I seriously don’t understand why people use Telegram instead of Signal. Any reason! The app doesn’t solve any privacy problem, default chats are unencrypted, keeps personal info. App should be dead already or turned into a dating app because it’s clearly not seriously privacy fucused.

Poeple use it because the UX is great, as well as the bot DX. E2EE isn't a critical feature for most people picking a chat app.

Signal is a great alternative to WhatsApp. Not so much for Telegram.

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#12

Post by endless1234 »

izzytcp wrote: post #8
neverrroot wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Channels, Groups, it’s overall way better. But true, per default not as secure. Supports secure chats, that are secure.

Are channels and groups e2ee?

No. Is discord, reddit, hacker news e2ee? No, but they are still products people want to use.

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#13

Post by greatgib »

Sadly I think that it is the slippery slope for Telegram. Instead of the spirit of privacy first, they start to concede little by little for commercial interests.

First it is just the IP and phone number. Then, it will be extended to contacts. Because, why not, that can be useful also for "terrorist investigations". Then it will be chat history,because it makes sense, the police has a warrant... And telegram is technically able to...

Also, clever poll tactic to put the option 1 as looking 'moderate' in front of other extreme options.

Also, for the fighting "terrorism" argument, just remember that we are all terrorists for Russia, and that even in Europe (Germany, France, ...), A lot of high ranking gov and police officials were found guilty of corruption or abusing the system for their own interests!

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#14

Post by londons_explore »

nulbyte wrote: post #5
izzytcp wrote: post #3

Hi, German here. How about not storing any information at all? Nothing to give, problem solved. Just like Signal. I seriously don’t understand why people use Telegram instead of Signal. Any reason! The app doesn’t solve any privacy problem, default chats are unencrypted, keeps personal info. App should be dead already or turned into a dating app because it’s clearly not seriously privacy fucused.

Sounds like option 3: "If this option is supported, Telegram will change its data structure and privacy policy for users from Germany."

I would prefer them to be clearer to say "we will redesign our systems so we no longer store IP addresses".

"Change our data structure" sounds like they might just host the servers outside the country and use a "Telegram Deutschland Inc" company that doesn't have access to any user data to run the service.

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#15

Post by pjio »

hnbad wrote: post #2

Note that they didn't provide options for "with a warrant" and "without a warrant", they only provided options for "with a warrant but only for suspected terrorism" and "for any serious crime but without a warrant". I suspect some users would vote for "any serious crime with a warrant" but will now vote for option 1 because they still want a warrant.

You're right, there is no option for "serious crime but only with warrant".

Option 1 is more strict in both ways. Only Terrorism (which is more serious than "just" crime) and even then only with a warrant. Option 2 is unacceptable (IMO). "serious crime" is too ambiguous and without a warrant prone to misuse.

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#16

Post by danhor »

hnbad wrote: post #2

Note that they didn't provide options for "with a warrant" and "without a warrant", they only provided options for "with a warrant but only for suspected terrorism" and "for any serious crime but without a warrant". I suspect some users would vote for "any serious crime with a warrant" but will now vote for option 1 because they still want a warrant.

The first option is leading right now so that's probably correct. In general germans are pretty trusting of the justice system, so I'd expect "serious crime with warrant" to win (at least I'd vote for it).

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#17

Post by croes »

endless1234 wrote: post #12
izzytcp wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are channels and groups e2ee?

No. Is discord, reddit, hacker news e2ee? No, but they are still products people want to use.

Do you use discord, reddit, hacker news for private communication?

BTW reddit and Hackernews are E2EE, it's just that one E is public.

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#18

Post by londons_explore »

cabirum wrote: post #10
traspler wrote: post #4

Is there anything special going on in Germany atm to prompt this? I‘m slighlty confused why they would do such a poll…

Germany repeatedly threanened to ban or remove Telegram from app stores if they ignore requests to delete channels or to provide some data. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/story/germany-tel...

If I were in telegrams position, I would move this power to 'moderators' rather like Reddit. Then tell the government that if they want to use a court order to remove content, they need to request that the independent moderators of the channel do it.

Re: Telegram is asking German users when to share information with law enforcement

#20

Post by [deleted] »

hnbad wrote: post #2

Note that they didn't provide options for "with a warrant" and "without a warrant", they only provided options for "with a warrant but only for suspected terrorism" and "for any serious crime but without a warrant". I suspect some users would vote for "any serious crime with a warrant" but will now vote for option 1 because they still want a warrant.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN