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

WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

orat.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 240 posts

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#211

Post by rodgerd »

superuser2 wrote: post #134
plusquamperfekt wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe for a synching feature it would be necessary to compromise on security of the data. The data is asymmetrically encrypted - so you'd have to synch it yourself by sending the data encrypted with you second phones key or you'd have to copy the private key itself. But I guess it would be possible. Though I don't miss this feature anyway.

iMessage already does this without leaking private keys by associating users with many public keys (per-device) instead of just one.

Yeah, telling everyone I want to communicate with they have to buy an iPhone to talk to me any more is a totally reasonable approach.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#212

Post by mintplant »

shawn-furyan wrote: post #199
mintplant wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No desktop client. There's a Chrome App being worked on, but that's not an ideal setup. I really don't know why they aren't focuing on this, as it's absolutely the #1 issue whenever I talk to someone about Signal. Even the Chrome App packaged in a standalone Electron-like setup would be better. edit: Apparently alpha versions of NW.js now support running Chrome Apps. This could be interesting. https://groups.google.c…

Small team + high security standards = slow development progress Why a chrome extension and not a desktop app? Because a desktop app is 3 desktop apps if you want to be cross platform, and since it is secure communication software, all of those edge cases that pop up in cross platform desktop application development really matter. I think it's better that Signal takes its time and gets it right so that eventually we…

So I did some testing, and with a little tweaking the Signal Chrome App can be run under the NW.js alpha as a standalone client. Both need to mature more before the combination becomes fully usable [1][2], but once everything is ready, this looks like a very simple way to set Signal up with cross-platform desktop apps.

[1] Signal-Browser doesn't seem to be able to add contacts properly when used with the production server, and the staging server looks like it's down right now.

[2] NW.js currently refuses to recognize Signal-Browser as a Chrome App unless I rename package.json to something else. Remote debugging doesn't seem to work with Chrome Apps running under NW.js at the moment - the inspector just gives me an empty response for each page I try to access. And there will need to be some way of configuring the Chromium engine to use Signal's self-signed SSL cert, though they'll have to solve this for the Chrome App as well.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#213

Post by dmix »

heitortsergent wrote: post #195
HappyTypist wrote: post #192

I think this is a good opportunity to plug Signal. Telegram uses a non-standard DIY crypto protocol that already had attacks, its chats are not end to end encrypted by default, and Telegram stores all your messages in the cloud by default while deceptively advertising as a 'private' alternative. Signal / TextSecure on the other hand is encrypted by default, implements more thoroughly audited cryptography, and is reco…

Are there any links that show those pieces of information about Telegram?

Matthew Green (a well regarded cryptographer) summarized it well:

> The UX is nice. The crypto is like being stabbed in the eye with a fork. https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/66668673163526553...

Which pieces of information do you need exactly? You can search HN for 'Telegram', it get's criticized nearly every time it makes headlines. Or just look at Telegram's interface and you'll see that 'secret chat' is not the default option, it's not end-to-end encrypted by default making it marginally more secure than HTTPS.

Signal/TextSecure on the otherhand has been the 'golden child' of the privacy and infosec scenes since it was released and their website has plenty of documentation on their protocol.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#214

Post by kitsunesoba »

mintplant wrote: post #157
plusquamperfekt wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the credibility attributed to Signal - f.x. by Bruce Schneier and Edward Snowden - I don't understand why it's not more popular than Telegram.

No desktop client. There's a Chrome App being worked on, but that's not an ideal setup. I really don't know why they aren't focuing on this, as it's absolutely the #1 issue whenever I talk to someone about Signal. Even the Chrome App packaged in a standalone Electron-like setup would be better. edit: Apparently alpha versions of NW.js now support running Chrome Apps. This could be interesting. https://groups.google.c…

This is my problem with Signal too. Chrome apps aren’t ideal either, given the weight and battery drain of Blink-wrapped web apps under OS X.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#215

Post by notspanishflu »

HappyTypist wrote: post #192

I think this is a good opportunity to plug Signal. Telegram uses a non-standard DIY crypto protocol that already had attacks, its chats are not end to end encrypted by default, and Telegram stores all your messages in the cloud by default while deceptively advertising as a 'private' alternative. Signal / TextSecure on the other hand is encrypted by default, implements more thoroughly audited cryptography, and is reco…

Not an option for me. Signal / TextSecure is not available for Ubuntu Phones yet and coding efforts like janimo is doing (1) are only half-cooked by now.

(1) https://github.com/janimo/textsecure-qml

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#216

Post by cvwright »

darklajid wrote: post #175
plusquamperfekt wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the credibility attributed to Signal - f.x. by Bruce Schneier and Edward Snowden - I don't understand why it's not more popular than Telegram.

It's .. the same thing. Now, bear with me: I don't say that it doesn't offer something over Telegram (most probably: Far better privacy/security), but it's a centralized service, hosted by a single entity, using your phone number as 'identity'. Ignore the first points, but the latter is so broken, Signal could be the most usable and glorious app ("Everything just works") on the planet and I'd still hate that idea. Ri…

TextSecure (the predecessor to Signal) used to support encrypted SMS. You could send all the encrypted messages you want without using their centralized service. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, they dropped that capability a few months ago. Then, to add insult to injury, the app disables itself if you don't update it for 6 months.

On the bright side, there's now an open source fork called SMSSecure. As the name implies, it does encrypted SMS. It works pretty well. I just hope the open source maintainers are keeping up with security updates to the protocol and not introducing any new bugs...

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#217

Post by spost »

HappyTypist wrote: post #192

I think this is a good opportunity to plug Signal. Telegram uses a non-standard DIY crypto protocol that already had attacks, its chats are not end to end encrypted by default, and Telegram stores all your messages in the cloud by default while deceptively advertising as a 'private' alternative. Signal / TextSecure on the other hand is encrypted by default, implements more thoroughly audited cryptography, and is reco…

Signal's great.

I don't use it because it doesn't sync chats between devices or have a desktop client.

Full-on e2e is great, and I'd use Signal if it supported my use case, but it doesn't. So I use Telegram instead, as a fast, easy-to-use, grandparent-compatible chat client with sane picture and file-transfer support. The oddball encryption and the fact that it's not end-to-end by default is a downside, but it's better than plaintext and it's actually useful to me, so…

Don't get me wrong, Signal is absolutely the right choice for people who don't need or care about multi-device syncing and only need a mobile client, or people who want the best security they can get. I fully support the widespread adoption of top-tier cryptography, including by people who don't need to protect their communications from global powers. But right now Signal is not (yet?) a one-size-fits-all solution.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#218

Post by kartan »

rms_returns wrote: post #104
izacus wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is IMO one of the greatest dangers of leaving those huge corporations like Facebook, Google, Amazon etc. unchecked - they're starting to attack competition by leveraging their primary products (Amazon blocking Chromecasts, Facebook censoring links and pages about their lawsuits are two latest cases) and are working deliberately against interests of greater public (and capitalism itself if we can stretch that :)…

It is not the anti-monopolistic authorities (who are part of the system, anyway), but WE_THE_PEOPLE who need to do something, so that competition is assured. WE need to keep switching services and not let one service rule everything. Be it messengers, social networking apps, eCommerce stores, ERP software, anything - If we choose one organization to rule them all, it won't be very long before they start showing the t…

It is anti-monopolistic authorities only purpose to do just that. And it is an important role to keep the economy running healthy. But I agree to an extend as I think that we also need to choose more actively to get better products. Each kind of action happens at a different level and they aren't mutually exclusive.

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#219

Post by seagreen »

seagreen wrote: post #193
prostoalex wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The heart of the problem is not publishing, it's discovery and curation. Grandma is not going to visit 20 dedicated servers for her grandkids picture fix, she needs it accessible in one place. But then how do you safeguard that place from the likes of games notifications and various spammy/fraudulent apps taking over?

> Grandma is not going to visit 20 dedicated servers for her grandkids picture fix, she needs it accessible in one place. This is certainly a problem. If only there was some kind of . . . mechanism . . . by which her computer could collect photos off her friends servers and display them locally? Sounds almost impossible! (Sorry for giving you a hard time:-) I appreciate your comment, but think that's a very solvable…

Since I can't edit anymore:

Your comment actually deserves a better response than I gave it. Spam is the open protocol killer. It's a totally serious issue. If our goal was to replicate HN or Reddit via only personal servers, I would be pretty dang paranoid about getting our anti-spam solution perfect:/

Happy in the case of Facebook-on-personal-servers, we have all the advantages and the spammers have all the disadvantages. Social network's main purpose is communication between people who know each other. Ignoring the Pages part of FB (which is really more Reddit-like than it is essential to a social network) communication happens between friends, or friends of friends commenting on photos or whatever. Spammy friend requests will be a problem, but that's not too big of a deal.

And then, once that's done . . . ahhhh. Your own filtering software, blocking game notifications to your heart's content (since it's your own server you can install whatever filter you want, though of course there will be good defaults). Guess where most of the unwanted posts on Twitter or Snapchat come from for me . . . Twitter and Snapchat. No more!

Re: WhatsApp is blocking Telegram links

#220

Post by MichaelGG »

plusquamperfekt wrote: post #66
3333z777 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reason not to use Telegram: https://oflisback.github.io/telegram-stalking/

Given the credibility attributed to Signal - f.x. by Bruce Schneier and Edward Snowden - I don't understand why it's not more popular than Telegram.

I can get my parents and others using Telegram. It's got lots of cute features, like short audio clips. "Self destruct", while not really true, at least provides a time based way to erase conversations. (Signal only does this by message count.)

Signal is getting way better, but Telegram is just a better messaging client at the moment.

Post reply on HN