Live data from Hacker News

Telegram - secure, free messaging

telegram.org

21–30 of 231 posts

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#21
So many dubious claims on just the front page:

* 'delivers messages faster than any other application' - any application? Hmmm. They must be using magic.

* 'messages are heavily encrypted and can self-destruct' - but like every system, the self-destruction is not assured since it's impossible to enforce.

* 'keeps your messages safe from hacker attacks' - a bold claim. Maybe they do some stuff to protect messages, but it's not the perfect safety that this statement implies.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#22
Looking at [1], it has several red flags.

The replay protection is overly complicated and doesn't kick in after the message is decrypted. This makes it possible to DoS the server with forged messages.

Key derivation uses a custom scheme. Typically there's no reason NOT to piggy-back on existing schemes and there's plenty to choose from - from TLS to IKE.

Also, as already mentioned, there's again NO reason not to use TLS in Anonymous DH mode with an app-level authentication of the session handshake.

Designing your own crypto protocols is a very interesting challenge, but for practical purposes you just have to recycle existing designs. There's really no other way about it. A custom crypto doesn't make any difference for those who doesn't know/care about it, but it certainly will not make you any friends between those who does. Unless, of course, you can explain and prove why your design is better than those that exist already, and these guys don't do this.

[1] http://core.telegram.org/mtproto/description

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#23
Looks like they kept the interface exactly the same as What's App to attract users. The smiley selection has the entire list of What's App smileys in exactly the same order. What's App is going to be upset, but it might help users.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#24
post #23

Looks like they kept the interface exactly the same as What's App to attract users. The smiley selection has the entire list of What's App smileys in exactly the same order. What's App is going to be upset, but it might help users.

I always that it was just the order of the emoji unicode range

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#25
post #7

From their FAQ: > Q: How secure is Telegram? > Very secure. We are based on a new protocol, MTProto, built by our own specialists from scratch, with security in mind. At this moment, the biggest security threat to your Telegram messages is your mother reading over your shoulder. We took care of the rest. Oh good, a bunch of randoms have rolled their own crypto. I stopped reading at this point.

MTProto's author is Nikolai Durov: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Durov

He is one of most legendary math/programming champions of all time.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#27
post #13
post #7

From their FAQ: > Q: How secure is Telegram? > Very secure. We are based on a new protocol, MTProto, built by our own specialists from scratch, with security in mind. At this moment, the biggest security threat to your Telegram messages is your mother reading over your shoulder. We took care of the rest. Oh good, a bunch of randoms have rolled their own crypto. I stopped reading at this point.

Gee, who are these random nobodies? http://telegram.org/faq#q-who-are-the-people-behind-telegram

These people are "random nobodies" in cryptographic protocol design.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#28

Is HTTPS not secure channel for communication between client-server? What is the reason behind using an entirely different protocol for client-server communication[0] over HTTP? [0] - http://core.telegram.org/mtproto

I also don't get this. If we stopped trusting HTTPS, how are we supposed to make sure that we get an unmodified app from the play store, or the original source code from GitHub in the first place? Am I missing something?

HTTPS is fine, it's just all the x509 surrounding it that people are upset about

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#29

Is HTTPS not secure channel for communication between client-server? What is the reason behind using an entirely different protocol for client-server communication[0] over HTTP? [0] - http://core.telegram.org/mtproto

I also don't get this. If we stopped trusting HTTPS, how are we supposed to make sure that we get an unmodified app from the play store, or the original source code from GitHub in the first place? Am I missing something?

The fact that we have to trust TLS to deliver software doesn't automatically mean that we should trust it for secure messaging.

Also, I think App Store software delivery doesn't depend on only TLS, but also on Apple's signature. And you can visually verify that the source code downloaded from GitHub doesn't contain backdoors.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#30
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't get this. If we stopped trusting HTTPS, how are we supposed to make sure that we get an unmodified app from the play store, or the original source code from GitHub in the first place? Am I missing something?

HTTPS is fine, it's just all the x509 surrounding it that people are upset about

No, it's not fine. Currently the only secure version of TLS is 1.2 with AES-GCM; and it's still not deployed widely.
Post reply on HN