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

Telegram - secure, free messaging

telegram.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 231 posts

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#91

Post by TelegramApp »

motters wrote: post #83

If this is closed source (and the source seems to be only implementing API calls to a closed system) then it's fair to assume that this application is probably insecure or has backdoors. Also if the private key is stored in the cloud then it's likely to be subject to requisitions.

Private keys for secret chats are only stored on the two participating devices.

As for server code — open sourcing the server code wouldn't really do much to improve trust. You would still have to trust us that we are using THAT code, not something different.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#92

Post by TelegramApp »

micheljansen wrote: post #73
userulluipeste wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Oh good, a bunch of randoms have rolled their own crypto. I stopped reading at this point." An ad-hominem attack. This is Hacker News and their work is open, how about making a statement after researching the actual code instead?

In this case, even if you remove the ad-hominem attack (a bunch of randoms), a valid point remains: implementing crypto is already notoriously difficult, let alone designing cryptographic protocols.

Still, there are sometimes valid reasons for not re-using existing solutions.

In our case, we needed something that is both secure and competitive in comparison to mass market solutions in terms of speed, working on weak connections and usability.

Disclaimer: I work for Telegram.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#94

Post by garethadams »

TelegramApp wrote: post #91
motters wrote: post #83

If this is closed source (and the source seems to be only implementing API calls to a closed system) then it's fair to assume that this application is probably insecure or has backdoors. Also if the private key is stored in the cloud then it's likely to be subject to requisitions.

Private keys for secret chats are only stored on the two participating devices. As for server code — open sourcing the server code wouldn't really do much to improve trust. You would still have to trust us that we are using THAT code, not something different.

Depending on your definition of "decentralised", open sourcing the code would enable other people to set up servers that they can trust is running that code.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#95

Post by Morgawr »

userulluipeste wrote: post #66
na85 wrote: 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.

"Oh good, a bunch of randoms have rolled their own crypto. I stopped reading at this point." An ad-hominem attack. This is Hacker News and their work is open, how about making a statement after researching the actual code instead?

If there is one place where an appeal to authority argument can hold place and not be seen as a fallacy is security. (it's not ad hominem btw)

When you're rolling out a secure system + implementation you want to use algorithms that have been proven, tested and certified as correct. It's a delicate field that can't be approached like your standard software development field. Yes, being a "random" and developing your own encryption algorithm out of the box is bad. Never trust anything like that. Period.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#96

Post by kpierre »

TelegramApp wrote: post #90
kpierre wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

make sure to check out their structure definition language: http://core.telegram.org/mtproto/TL-dependent look like a great parody to me? can't tell if they are serious with these 'dependent types'

Is anything wrong with it?

it's ridiculous, pseudo-mathematical, and a severe case of NIH syndrome :-) Peano numbers for data definition language? are you serious?

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#97

Post by Morgawr »

TelegramApp wrote: post #84
huhtenberg wrote: post #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…

The reason for designing something new was this: in order for really secure messaging to catch on among the masses today — it needs not only be secure. When you want to compete with the likes of WA, you also need be fast and reliable on weak mobile connections. TLS/HTTPS is slow and takes a lot of time to restore connection on fragile networks. MTProto was born as a result of an experiment: whether it would be possib…

>MTProto was born as a result of an experiment: whether it would be possible to create something that is both secure and fast.

I'd like to see some papers/surveys/case studies on the matter. Yes, it's an "experiment", doesn't mean it's a good idea to roll out your own implementation before performing (and publishing) extensive tests.

Not saying you're doing something wrong, just that security-oriented people (usually who'd be interested in your product) may want to know more than just "yes guys it's secure, trust us".

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#98

Post by skion »

fwr wrote: post #13
na85 wrote: 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

"As a result, Telegram is the fastest and most secure messaging system in the world."

That's a very bold and yet to be proven statement. Probably any crypto expert would know better than to say that.

This paragraph exactly pin points the problem with being a cryptographic nobody.

PS. I do like their icon designer.

Re: Telegram - secure, free messaging

#100

Post by ge0rg »

Ihmahr wrote: post #89
ge0rg wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An "encrypted communications app" that is not using secure encryption is worse than an unencrypted one - the users get a fake feeling of security, and might reveal sensitive information to whoever is listening. Regarding real security, have a look at ChatSecure, which is available for iOS and Android, uses standard encryption protocols (XMPP with TLS, OTR), is open source, and was developed by the Guardian Project (w…

Yes, I have been using chatsecure and I know it is much more secure but it is almost unusable on ios because it can not run in background. As for the false sense of security, you're probably right.

but it is almost unusable on ios because it can not run in background

Unfortunately, the only way around that is to integrate with Apple's Push Service, which means you need to run a server-side component which notifies Apple (and which in turn notifies your app). This is not specified for XMPP, so most "XMPP clients" for iOS instead store your credential on the app developer's infrastructure. However, this problem is being worked on:

http://legastero.github.io/customxeps/extensions/push.html

Post reply on HN