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

After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

livelaw.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 230 posts

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#41

Post by yieldcrv »

vore wrote: post #25
Markoff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ROFL Signal uses centralized server with closed source (they hidden code for one year until they finally gave up when users nagged them, nobody knows what they did during that year), Signal requires your phone number, Signal doesn't allow third party apps officially and tried to push some shady crypto, I mean how many red flags you need to avoid such POS app?

The Signal client has always been open source: you can inspect precisely what the client is sending to the server (if you trust the source). If you're not sending undesirable information from the client to the server, no amount of closed source-ness of the server is going to get that from you. Signal has always been transparent about what information get sent to the server: https://signal.org/blog/private-contact-dis…

yes, we can transparently see that it is a failure of a solution due to having our phone number and check this out: Signal's application isn't the only participant in Signal's application we don't want having that

speaking of dense exotic matter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#42

Post by _8j50 »

vore wrote: post #25
Markoff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ROFL Signal uses centralized server with closed source (they hidden code for one year until they finally gave up when users nagged them, nobody knows what they did during that year), Signal requires your phone number, Signal doesn't allow third party apps officially and tried to push some shady crypto, I mean how many red flags you need to avoid such POS app?

The Signal client has always been open source: you can inspect precisely what the client is sending to the server (if you trust the source). If you're not sending undesirable information from the client to the server, no amount of closed source-ness of the server is going to get that from you. Signal has always been transparent about what information get sent to the server: https://signal.org/blog/private-contact-dis…

Backdoors are funny that way, sometimes the client operates correctly but a weakness in implementation can be abused by the server. Not that i know or think this is happening but they do insist on that phone number at all costs which these days is more identifying than a finger print which allows targeted exploitation if the server facilitating connectivity was hostile for whatever reason.

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#43

Post by ls15 »

ummonk wrote: post #21
ls15 wrote: post #2

Don't use messengers that ask for your phone number and aren't end-to-end encrypted. Use services that store as little data as possible. If data is stored, it can be given away and I would assume that it will be given away. Telegram disguises itself as encrypted chat app, when it is actually just a regular centralized plaintext messenger that has an encryption feature that nobody uses.

End-to-end encryption doesn't protect you from this, since any recipient can report illegal material to the authorities and trigger an investigation of the sender.

Agreed, ideally you have both, e2ee and no linked phone number.

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#44

Post by imiric »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #18
ls15 wrote: post #2

Don't use messengers that ask for your phone number and aren't end-to-end encrypted. Use services that store as little data as possible. If data is stored, it can be given away and I would assume that it will be given away. Telegram disguises itself as encrypted chat app, when it is actually just a regular centralized plaintext messenger that has an encryption feature that nobody uses.

yes. yes yes. yes. yes 100%. the same reason i avoid whatsapp and signal like the plague. "mobile number" is in itself a big identifier when you are living in a place where you have o do mandatory KYC so that the government knows which each mobile number is linked to the actual human being. i dont care signal doesnt hold any messages. the government can ask for my number and they can use the xkcd spanner method to do…

Sure, but couldn't you just use a disposable number? (Assuming you live in a place where you can buy SIM cards without showing a personal ID, which is most countries.)

That's a minor inconvenience compared to not being able to communicate with most people who use these mainstream networks.

I'm more worried about the lack of encryption and trustworthiness aspect of them than giving away a phone number.

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#45

Post by baxtr »

ls15 wrote: post #2

Don't use messengers that ask for your phone number and aren't end-to-end encrypted. Use services that store as little data as possible. If data is stored, it can be given away and I would assume that it will be given away. Telegram disguises itself as encrypted chat app, when it is actually just a regular centralized plaintext messenger that has an encryption feature that nobody uses.

Which ones don't ask for a phone number?

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#47

Post by ls15 »

selfmodruntime wrote: post #40
Eleison23 wrote: post #24

Quoted post unavailable.

> What's your threat model that you can't use conventional channels to communicate stuff? If you shouldn't be saying it, don't say it. If you're being censored, perhaps there's a reason why. What an incredibly (western) privileged thing to say. LGBTQ people and oppressed women need secure channels to protect their lives. Protestors need secure channels to free themselves of censorship and an oppressive regime. Grow u…

> (western) privileged thing to say

Westerners need privacy too. The reversal of Roe v. Wade is a good reason for example.

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#48

Post by Semaphor »

baxtr wrote: post #45
ls15 wrote: post #2

Don't use messengers that ask for your phone number and aren't end-to-end encrypted. Use services that store as little data as possible. If data is stored, it can be given away and I would assume that it will be given away. Telegram disguises itself as encrypted chat app, when it is actually just a regular centralized plaintext messenger that has an encryption feature that nobody uses.

Which ones don't ask for a phone number?

Jabber/XMPP, Matrix are the obvious answers.

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#49

Post by emptysongglass »

ls15 wrote: post #6
emptysongglass wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Telegram disguises itself as encrypted chat app Where does it do this?

https://telegram.org/ > Private > Telegram messages are heavily encrypted and can self-destruct.

But they are encrypted. I think you're looking for e2ee, which it advertises only for Secret Chats.

Re: After Delhi High Court ruling, Telegram discloses personal details of users

#50

Post by Semaphor »

ls15 wrote: post #19
Normille wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Use Matrix clients (Element, Fluffy chat) or Session, Briar... With those other clients you mention, one of the reasons your communications will remain secure is that --because so few people use them-- you'll struggle to find anyone to message, in the first place.

I think you are underestimating exponential growth: https://news.itsfoss.com/matrix-sixty-million-users/

I think you are overestimating. I know more Jabber users than Matrix. And the overlap with people I’m in actual contact with, as opposed to people I used to study C.Sc. with, is 0 for both.
Post reply on HN