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

491–500 of 609 posts

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#491

Post by alufers »

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…

I don't know how much you have used Telegram, but it's ridden with absolutely vile stuff.

You open the "Telegram nearby" feature anywhere and it's full of people selling drugs and scams. When I mistyped something in the search bar I ended up in some ISIS propaganda channel (which was straight up calling for violence/terrorism). All of this on unencrypted public groups/channels ofc (I'm pretty sure it's the same with CP, although I'm afraid to check for obvious reasons).

I think there is a line between "protecting free speech" and being complicit in crime. This line has been crossed by Telegram.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#492

Post by nrr »

zaik wrote: post #428
nrr wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You need to run your own platform people." What problem does this solve? I'm someone who's been on the business end of a subpoena for a platform I ran, and narcing on my friends under threat of being held in contempt is perhaps the worst feeling I'm doomed to live with. "XMPP is ..." not the solution I'd recommend, even with something like OMEMO. Is it on by default? Can you force it to be turned on? The answer to b…

> The answer to both of those is, as it turns out, "no" This is not true, it depends on the client. Conversations has OMEMO enabled per default.

I don't see any practical difference between "it depends" and "no" here.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#493

Post by prmoustache »

as1mov wrote: post #70
kitkat_new wrote: post #2

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

Anecdotal evidence, so take this with a grain of salt - I work with a bunch of people from Ukraine and almost all of them exclusively use Telegram to keep up with the news and family back home. From talking to them for a while, it's mostly because it's free, has excellent support for sync across multiple devices (including audio, video and other media), has support for proxies to circumvent any kind of blocking, publ…

Ideally they should really use something like jami. https://jami.net/

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#494

Post by prmoustache »

theshrike79 wrote: post #159
as1mov wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I was wrong. Just checked and Telegram does require a phone number to sign up. I haven't used it myself much, but was relaying the general reasons why regular people use it.

You need it to register, but afaik it's not shown to anyone in any way. You can just grab any prepaid SIM and use it if that's your style

Yep but you still need to have it staying activated and on whenever you need to activate the telegram app on a device.

I was using telegram for one single usage, which was a group organizing local meetups events for expats. When I switched smartphone I really didn't want to install an app just for one group and would have preferred using telegram web to consult it occasionnally. Every time I tried logging in on a computer/smartphone it told me to validate the login from telegram on my original, now wiped clean, smartphone. I just gave up.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#495

Post by medo-bear »

tcfhgj wrote: post #470
medo-bear wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They probably should implement E2EE for everything Certainly not because then Telegram would lose alot of its functionality that makes it great. One thing that I really enjoy about Telegram is that I can have it open and synched across many independent devices. Telegram also has e2e as an option on some clients which cant be synched

You can sync messages across many independent devices despite e2ee. Matrix has been doing that for years

Does Matrix encryption scale? Telegram rooms have a huge number of participants. Also last time I looked into this, Matrix encryption was also an opt in.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#496

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#498

Post by StrLght »

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…

> Censorship is when a third party uses coercion to force admins to submit to them and remove posts against their will

What a weird hill to die on, given the whole context of this situation.

Do you see public recruitment of people into terrorist cells as a freedom of speech? Do you see publicly selling drugs as a freedom of speech? It isn't about censorship at all, it's about actual *illegal* activity.

Now it's up to Durov and his lawyers to prove that Telegram actually dealt with that. So far France doesn't seem convinced.

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#499

Post by sulandor »

alufers wrote: post #491
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…

I don't know how much you have used Telegram, but it's ridden with absolutely vile stuff. You open the "Telegram nearby" feature anywhere and it's full of people selling drugs and scams. When I mistyped something in the search bar I ended up in some ISIS propaganda channel (which was straight up calling for violence/terrorism). All of this on unencrypted public groups/channels ofc (I'm pretty sure it's the same with…

it's not specific to anything but humans, which are ridden with vile stuff.

just turn off any discovery and suggestion features

Re: Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

#500

Post by devjab »

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #352
devjab wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can give you some insight into why EU law enforcement and politicians dislike telegram. It’s not because they can’t snoop on you, it’s because Telegram fails to comply with moderation requests for channels where illegal content is shared. We had a nice scandal of sorts here in Denmark where a bunch of young men shared pictures of young women without consent. If you’re old enough to remember those old “rate this gir…

> you’ll know what the pictures were used for. Fapping on? And what's the problem with that, exactly?

It’s illegal to share pictures without consent. Especially if it’s nudes. On top of that it was the equivalent of high schoolers so much of it was 15-17 year olds. Minors.

I believe there was a public discussion on whether putting sharing of child pornography on a 15-19 year olds permanent record was the right thing to do in the context. Considering they are all similarly aged and are allowed to have sex and share nudes with consent. I can’t remember how it went, it wasn’t something I followed very closely.

Post reply on HN