Earlier quoted context omitted.
What country do you live in?
Kazakhstan.
That makes sense, AFAIK Telegram is most popular in the post-Soviet countries.
Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
91–100 of 501 posts
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#92I don't know about Telegram being nasty towards Signal but Signal brought this upon themselves. Metadata are more important than the content of the messages and yet Signal has always been about knowing your phone number, with handwaving when the subject is mentioned. Sessions, a Signal fork, had its tagline right: "Share encrypted messages, not metadata" . Signal is a metadata exchanging app and it's about collecting…
> To me Telegram is going after WhatsApp, not Signal.
yeah exactly so what is actually going on here?
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#93https://nitter.poast.org/matthew_d_green/status/178968789886...
On Signal vs Telegram:
Telegrams Encryption is off most of the time. They have serverside access to messages. The optional E2E is annoying to use and isnt even available on every platform. For example Tdesktop afaik still has no E2E support. (And has a very brittle software architecture.) You can't register Telegram accounts with the open source client anymore. This should be a non-Discussion.
MG implying that just because other messengers like Whatsapp use Signals encryption scheme does not make them more more trustworthy.
Yes you can verify in a binary if the stuff is implemented well. But if a vendor has control over the update channel or beta rollout features its kinda easy to hide targeted features. Wasn't Whatsapp caught exfiltrating chats in ways that don't involve the normal channel bypassing E2E?
Btw there is no Signal in Fdroid but nowadays there is an accepted by upstream third party implementation. You could separate software and infra vendor. Look at Molly.im
Better to bring non tech folk to Signal than to other messengers that do the same but less protected.
Matrix? Lol!
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#94[flagged]
We don’t have to trust the board. We have the binaries.
Would make more sense if it is reproducible builds. Shouldn't we just all switch to matrix clients which use Olm and Megolm cryptographic ratchets and it doesn't rely on one server/one entity.
And looks like it is implemented in Rust:
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#95https://nitter.poast.org/matthew_d_green/status/178968789886...
A nitter instance that still works? What is this sorcery?
Replace https://twitter.com with https://twiiit.com (3 i's), it will automatically redirect a Twtr link to a working instance.
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#96Stating that Telegram is unencrypted is incorrect. It offers optional end-to-end encryption; however, by default, it uses encryption in transit. Of course, there is a trade-off between convenience and encryption, and having access to all messages on all devices is beneficial.
However, technicalities are not the point: both Ukrainians and Russians trust Telegram—despite being at war. Telegram has managed to distribute its servers and legal presence across multiple countries, making it challenging for courts to track. This provides a level of security that American-based entities cannot offer.
There is a great discussion by Pinboard on why telegram is more safe, and it is preferred by activists in Hong Kong: https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/1474096410383421452 "There's a disconnect between critiques of Telegram and its practical use that have made me uneasy about joining technical pile-ons around how it's not really encrypted messaging. Let me use the example of Telegram use in the Hong Kong protests..."
If anything, all this animosity toward telegram has always been a bit suspicious to me. But anyway, assume your cellphone to be extremely unsafe.
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#97For more context, here are some of the references related to this thread: > Pavel Durov, the CEO of Telegram, has recently been making a big conspiracy push to promote Telegram as more secure than Signal.. https://t.me/durov/274 Jack Dorsey's Tweet: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1787895769183268948
[deleted]
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#98I don't know about Telegram being nasty towards Signal but Signal brought this upon themselves. Metadata are more important than the content of the messages and yet Signal has always been about knowing your phone number, with handwaving when the subject is mentioned. Sessions, a Signal fork, had its tagline right: "Share encrypted messages, not metadata" . Signal is a metadata exchanging app and it's about collecting…
Signal has got Usernames now.
You can block number discovery.
You can't resolve username to number.
Your main account ID internally is not your number anymore.
If 2 users add you using 2 different links or usernames. Its now harder to confirm its the same account.
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#99> An alarming number of important people I’ve spoken to remarked that their “private” Signal messages had been exploited against them in US courts or media.
Any sources for this except the private testimony of a Signal competitor talking about his important friends? (ETA: Or is it when the court/media obtains your unlocked phone, in which case Telegram won't protect you either...)
Re: Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to malign Signal as insecure
#100Telegram were claiming they were more secure even when they had their own home-rolled crypto. Security is not Telegram's strong point and it never was.
Why is home-rolled crypto inherently insecure?