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

Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

blog.cryptographyengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 609 posts

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#471

Post by sam_lowry_ »

tsimionescu wrote: post #444
maqp wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they take theatrics over logical evaluation of the situation. Cool. Tell them Durov could have locked himself out of their data and spared himself the trip to behind bars.

Durov is in jail because he is not doing moderation of public chat channels, as far as has been shared. It has exactly nothing to do with encryption or privacy, in both directions (that is, it doesn't in the slightest prove that Telegram doesn't share private data with various states; and E2EE of private chats would not have done one iota to keep him out of jail).

You probably don't use Telegram channels much. There are some drug and prostitution related channels you can search for but they disappear rather quickly or are totally empty.

Christo Grozev shared screenshots of a few CSAM channels yesterday, but if you search for them, they do not seem to exist.

Telegram clearly does less pre-moderation than Facebook, but they are smaller and have less computing and they do not seem to rely on the masses of Nigerian moderators that work for 5$/day as Facebook does.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#472

Post by oloila »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #34

Try the mud puddle test: log into your account on a new device using the password recovery flow. Can you see your old messages? If the answer is yes then law enforcement can too. https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2012/08/05/how-se...

Telegram has secure calls and secure e2e private chats. All other chats are cloud-backupped. So if you have an intent of using private communication - the answer is "no", if you don't care - the answer is "yes"

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#473

Post by tcfhgj »

alerighi wrote: post #118
bryanlarsen wrote: post #34

Try the mud puddle test: log into your account on a new device using the password recovery flow. Can you see your old messages? If the answer is yes then law enforcement can too. https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2012/08/05/how-se...

Well of course, but this is a feature of Telegram. It's the only messaging app where messages are stored on the cloud. This of course has security implications, but also allows you to have a big number of chats without wasting your device memory like WhatsApp does, or having to delete old conversations, and allows you to access your chats from any device. By the way you can also set a password to log in from another…

> Well of course, but this is a feature of Telegram. It's the only messaging app where messages are stored on the cloud.

Wrong, Matrix does it too, but fully e2ee.

> and allows you to access your chats from any device.

No it doesn't, because it is possible withh e2ee as well

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#474

Post by K7J6H5G4 »

Canada wrote: post #468

Let's stop repeating this word "moderate" when what we're talking about is censorship. Moderation is what happens here on HN: Admins have some policies to keep the conversation on track, users voluntarily submit to them. Censorship is when a third party uses coercion to force admins to submit to them and remove posts against their will. Durov has been arrested for refusing to implement censorship, not for anything co…

The only difference between "moderation" and "censorship" is whether you like the policy or not.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#475

Post by freehorse »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #252
lxgr wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that the mud puddle test was originally described on Matt's very blog: https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2012/04/05/icloud-w... :)

And it only works because a corporation likely would want to offer this to its users as a convenient feature. If they were actively trying to hide this, they can rig the test and keep access to themselves.

It is true that passing the mud puddle test does not guarantee robust end-to-end encryption (there can still be backdoors reserved for company/law enforcement). But failing it definitely guarantees that there is no robust end-to-end encryption.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#476

Post by tcfhgj »

skeledrew wrote: post #287
thisisabore wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matrix also keeps your message on the server. Except you can run your own server. And the messages are end to end encrypted. And you can keep a proper backup of the keys. Granted it can be clunky at times, but the properties are there and decentralised end to end encrypted messaging is quite and incredible thing. (Yes, Matrix nerds, it's not messaging per se it's really state replication, I know :))

As you alluded to, Matrix has really horrible UX. Telegram is meant to be easy for the many to use: finding content in chats or even globally across public channels for example is intuitive and snappy because their server does the heavy lifting. That's a huge sell for many, myself included.

Well, ux aside, he disproves that you can't have synced messages with e2ee

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#477

Post by misiek08 »

throwuxiytayq wrote: post #360
jxi wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal has probably the worst UX of any messaging app. It also used to require sharing phone numbers to add contacts, which imo is already a privacy violation. Telegram is fast, responsive, gets frequent updates, has great group chat, tons of animated emojis, works flawlessly on all desktop and mobile platforms, has great support for media, bots, and a great API, allows edits and deleting messages for all users, and…

Telegram consumes up to 50% of battery charge on iOS, with practically zero daily usage, all energy saving settings enabled, and a single followed channel, whether or not I force close the app or reinstall it. I gave up on trying to make it work, merely installing the fucking app ensures my phone is dead in the morning.

I have group of 15 friends using it and it barely uses 2% of battery while using it. Either you are just spreading misinformation or you should check your phone for custom wires added by the bad guys.

13 people on iOSes, iPhones from 11s to 15 Pro; 2 Androids.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#478

Post by rldjbpin »

kitkat_new wrote: post #2

The worst thing is that almost every non-techie who uses Telegram thinks Telegram in general is e2ee.

not everybody understands that "encrypted" =/= "end-to-end encrypted".

the perceived secure nature of telegram has been memorialized in mainstream rap, courtesy kendrick lamar in 2017 (https://genius.com/11665524).

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#479

Post by VMG »

Canada wrote: post #468

Let's stop repeating this word "moderate" when what we're talking about is censorship. Moderation is what happens here on HN: Admins have some policies to keep the conversation on track, users voluntarily submit to them. Censorship is when a third party uses coercion to force admins to submit to them and remove posts against their will. Durov has been arrested for refusing to implement censorship, not for anything co…

is removal of CSAM moderation or censorship?

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#480

Post by ossyrial »

Canada wrote: post #468

Let's stop repeating this word "moderate" when what we're talking about is censorship. Moderation is what happens here on HN: Admins have some policies to keep the conversation on track, users voluntarily submit to them. Censorship is when a third party uses coercion to force admins to submit to them and remove posts against their will. Durov has been arrested for refusing to implement censorship, not for anything co…

> Moderation is what happens here on HN: Admins have some policies to keep the conversation on track, users voluntarily submit to them.

What do you mean by users voluntarily submitting to these policies? This distinction seems key in your argument, but I don't see what alternatives to submitting I have here, making it involuntary, right?

Post reply on HN