441–450 of 557 posts
It's not surprising that every time Telegram pops up here, many comments miss the fact that Telegram has a great UX, a great feature set and also provides the kind of privacy protestors value, i.e., not having their phone numbers flashed to every random stranger in groups or to random channel owners whose channels you've subscribed to. With Telegram you cannot even do a phone number enumeration attack (this can be ch…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you realize end-to-end encryption is a necessary property of all features, you realize Telegram lacks even basic things like desktop clients, syncable chats, and group chats. Not so feature rich anymore ;)
E2E-encryption is really nice but not anymore necessary for most users of Telegram than for - WhatsApp before they implemented it - GMail (or any other mail service) - Matrix (by default, until recently?) - IRC - SMS - Letters in the mail For some reason this has a tendency to boil down very quickly to - E2E-encryptet === good, no further information needed - anything else === bad, no further information needed Which…
https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&q=are+telegram+cha...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is why I'm confused people are even talking about their encryption in this thread. This has nothing to do with secure chats and everything to do with Telegram's Channels feature. But a ton of people that have never used Telegram nor read the article don't know that.
And proxies. Telegram has great proxy support and virtually anyone can install their own MTProxy in 5 min. A multitude of proxies, shadow optic cables over the border and a bit of whitelisting from the government to allow payment processing made Telegram invincible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is all information in bad faith. The protocol and all Telegram is open source. Are you a cryptographer? And who "rolled" the Signal protocol, Moxie Marlinspike? Did he not design that himself?
> ...and all Telegram is open source. This is demonstrably false. Telegram's apps are open sourced (except Telegram X for some reason), same as Signal's (no exceptions). None of the two offer you their server's code. > And who "rolled" the Signal protocol, Moxie Marlinspike? Did he not design that himself? It passed the scrutiny of the best cryptographers out there. This comment provides more info: https://news.ycomb…
Signal server source code:
https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server
"The vast majority of Telegram's usage is not end-to-end encrypted at all."
This. This is the backdoor right here. It was never going to be shady flaw in the implementation. It's SO much easier to put it out there in the open, spread misinformation about Telegram being at the forefront of privacy battle and silence all criticism (my links were shadowbanned on their subreddit), and to attack straw men like people posting example's of Telegram's bad track record. tl;dr: damage control.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which would make me not want to use it if I was a revolutionary in a totalitarian state that could get access to that data.
Telegram having access doesn't necessarily mean the totalitarian state gets access, though I see your point
Why not Signal? It’s the way to go as far as messaging apps are concerned.
Because Signal is shit for anything other than 1-1 communications. Group management is extremely cumbersome and large scale channels, while not impossible, require external assistance (with all the security implications). Signal is definitely more secure than Telegram, but the latter has a far better user interface, API, and social ecosystem, which gives rise to massive networks effects that are simply not available…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just in case anyone is wondering. The 'official' vote count for Thikhanovskaya is 588,622. So regardless of how unbiased a sample it may be the Telegram poll shows over 2x as many people (or phone numbers to be exact), willing to vote for Thikhanovskaya (at the time of writing). Use this information as you wish.
That's cool and all, except everyone in that country had 2 sim cards with 2 numbers. They don't have free long distance over there, nor are plans for cheap text+data the same plans as cheap calls. So I take this information to mean this poll was useless. Everyone who voted could vote twice, and felons and kids voted too.
Why not Signal? It’s the way to go as far as messaging apps are concerned.
My recollection (can someone verify?) is that Telegram continues to function in limited-connectivity environments, making it a good fit for situations where a state actor is limiting network access.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sort of, there is pseudoanonimity layer in Telegram that doesn't show your phone number to others, so if you can be reasonably sure that Telegram isn't going to give you up to the police of your country - your privacy can be preserved. While Signal literally identifies contacts via phone numbers and there is no mass communication features anyway, so it's both less private and less useful for such purposes.
> Signal literally identifies contacts via phone numbers that's so stupid. why people here keeps arguing that Signal crypto is safer when its architecture is SO unsafe?
Telegram knows who you are and who you talk to, they store your contact list. Signal knows who you are, but they don't store your contact list.
Also, Signal is already working on usernames. Your criticism is just silly.