Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport • Hacker News Board

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#911

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #657

13415 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your characterization fits basically any encryption program, including PGP and SSL connections by a web browser.

No it doesn't. If you set up PGP or SSL you'll be able to encrypt things and might even misuse this capability for crime, but you won't have installed a platform where crime is openly advertised. I like Telegram, a lot, but if you're ignoring the fact that large parts of it openly function as a mall for criminal services (and it's 100x easier to find that stuff than via Tor, for example) you're not being honest with…

[deleted]

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#912

Post by Peteragain » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:11 PM UTC

Musk and Durov share views on privacy. If the West did the same to Musk, he'd move SpaceX to Russia in the blink of an eye and Tesla to China. Musk is safe because he is the embodiment of the American dream of American superiority. NASA and Boeing: yesterday's heros. This action is not 'rule of law' - don't bother trying to figure it out - it is just politically motivated. No discussion required. .. in my opinion.

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#913

Post by lxgr » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:22 PM UTC

artembugara wrote: post #26

According to this source he’s accused in non-cooperating. He’s not accused of terrorism, drug, or slaving directly. Very interesting to see where it will all go. I don’t understand how they’re going to convince French judges that he’s guilty for not being able to decrypt chats that he has no keys for…

> I don’t understand how they’re going to convince French judges that he’s guilty for not being able to decrypt chats that he has no keys for…

That false statement is refutable trivially: Just perform the mud puddle test [1] in front of the judge (and a cryptographer explaining the implications to the judge).

[1] https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2012/04/05/icloud-w...

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#914

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:24 PM UTC

sega_sai wrote: post #494

akira2501 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it is perfectly fair for governments to have some control to take down large channels that are clearly against the law How is a channel "against the law?" Do you mean access to the channel is creating opportunities for lawlessness that simply wouldn't exist otherwise? I'm not sure the French justice system has demonstrated that it has exhausted all options other than to handcuff a CEO of one particular plat…

A channel that incites violence is against the law (in some countries). A channel selling drugs is against the law. These are few examples. I do not how the specific details of the French case to comment on the specifics. I could believe the arrest is poorly justified, but I have reasonably belief in their justice system.

A channel doesn’t do that though. People do that. If I take a megaphone to the street corner and start selling drugs, are you really going to arrest the megaphone I used?

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#915

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

39896880 wrote: post #878

bun_terminator wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also perfectly fair to believe that no written (or spoken) word should be illegal

There is no place on earth which has laws that abide by this principle.

Most peoples homes would count. Most people don’t enforce their governments laws on each other. They have their own moral code and logic that takes precedence over whatever the politicians have actually penned on paper.

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#916

Post by garrettgarcia » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:31 PM UTC

Kbelicius wrote: post #729

garrettgarcia wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why stop there? By your logic, the owners of every ISP that provides a pathway for those criminal bits also should be in jail. Every single organization in that pathway would be liable from the registrars to the developers of web libraries or other app services. The governments themselves would be liable in many cases where the government has nationalized internet services. There is a principle in the free world that…

> Why stop there? By your logic, the owners of every ISP that provides a pathway for those criminal bits also should be in jail. No, that is by your own logic, not GPs. GP clearly said: "You can't just provide a service that knowingly provides a platform to criminal activity and do jack shit.". Considering that ISPs do something about that activity, by GPs logic, owners of ISP should not be in jail. Am I worng?

Yes, you are wrong. Let me explain. GP laid out his principle above: "If your app is known to be uses heavily by criminals ranging from Pedo's to drug dealers. You are liable."

He doesn't say that doing "jack shit" (not exactly a fleshed out legal term) will remove that liability, as you are suggesting.

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#917

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:31 PM UTC

vwkd wrote: post #435

https://x.com/christogrozev/status/1827450631462048023 > I wonder what caught up with him first: the undisturbed sale of hard drugs vIa telegram, or the undisturbed recruitment of freelancers for GRU's terrorist attacks across Europe. Seems there could be some truth to the accusations.

Still a bs argument. 1890s, terrorists takes a mule to the assassination. 1920s, terrorist drives a car to the assassination, and now we deem henry ford liable because of it.

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#918

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:32 PM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #706

codedokode wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cannot terrorist-freelancers (whatever that means) be recruited with Element, Signal, VK or email on Yandex?

Sure, but if the people who run those services are responsive to law enforcement requests about that behavior, the law is usually satisfied. Telegram's policy is apparently to not moderate anything, and ignore law enforcement requests. I'm not saying Telegram is right or wrong here, just that their behavior may not be legal in places like France.

What about exchanging paper one time pads? We ought to go after the paper mill for not securing their product by this logic.

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#919

Post by pizzafeelsright » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:35 PM UTC

grishka wrote: post #582

pizzafeelsright wrote: post #387

Until the phone number is disconnected completely from the account I am certain these message services are either lying or honeypots. You can have end to end encryption without a phone number. To require it means you're opening up possibilities of State and location tracking.

Telegram has anonymous +888 "phone numbers" that exist on the TON blockchain as NFTs.

Entirely trackable

Re: Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport

#920

Post by garrettgarcia » Sun, Aug 25, 2024, 5:38 PM UTC

NoboruWataya wrote: post #483

garrettgarcia wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why stop there? By your logic, the owners of every ISP that provides a pathway for those criminal bits also should be in jail. Every single organization in that pathway would be liable from the registrars to the developers of web libraries or other app services. The governments themselves would be liable in many cases where the government has nationalized internet services. There is a principle in the free world that…

> Why stop there? Because we want to, and we can. I don't get how HN consistently fails to understand the actual social and political process by which regulations are made. I constantly see this argument which effectively boils down to "if you ban a thing, you will also need to ban everything else, which is absurd, so you shouldn't ban anything". But in real life we can choose what we ban. Everything is a trade-off;…

> But in real life we can choose what we ban. Everything is a trade-off; we can choose to ban something if the harm it creates is considered to outweigh its benefit to society.

This is the principle behind, and popularize by, Nazism and Soviet-style communism. In short, it is the arbitrary use of force against whichever targets the ruling bureaucrats deem to be "socially harmful". This principle leads inevitably to mass murder and war, as history has shown repeatedly and without exception.

You seem to fantasize that you'll be in the in-group who gets to decide who is harmful. But then one day it will be you who is considered harmful. And the state will sacrifice your life for the "benefit of society".