81
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by clot27@lemm.ee to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

This is an article written by telegram's founder and CEO Pavel Durov in 2019 on "Why whatsapp will never be secure". Your thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 85 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Sure, fuck WhatsApp, but Telegram isn't even end-to-end encrypted most of the time. Their group chats never are, and their "secret chat" encryption for non-group chats must be explicitly enabled and hardly ever is because it disables some features. And when it is encrypted, it's with some dubious nonstandard cryptography.

It's also pseudo open source; they do publish source code once in a while but it never corresponds to the binaries that nearly everyone actually uses.

And the audacity to talk about metadata when Telegram accounts still require a phone number today (as they did five years ago when this post was written) is just... 🤯

State-sponsored exploits against WhatsApp might be more common than against Telegram, or at least we hear about them more, but it's not because the app is more vulnerable: it's because governments don't need to compromise the endpoint to read your Telegram messages: they can just add a new device to your account with an SMS and see everything.

(╯° °)╯︵ ┻━┻

Anything claiming to prioritize privacy yet asking for your phone number (Telegram, WhatsApp, Signal, ...) is a farce.

[-] Neon@lemmy.world 22 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Anything claiming to prioritize privacy yet asking for your phone number (Telegram, WhatsApp, Signal, ...) is a farce.

Yeah, sure. The privacy farce signal.

I'm getting tired of this stupid hardline-take.

[-] randint@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 9 points 7 months ago

Shit, 2019 really was five years ago.

[-] nutomic@lemmy.ml 9 points 7 months ago

Telegram isn't perfect, but it is infinitely better than Whatsapp because it doesn't belong to Facebook, and also isn't from the United States. Also it can be used by normies without problem, unlike Matrix or Xmpp or what have you.

[-] moreeni@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

Brother, it has servers all over the world (including the US) where it hosts your data unencrypted. Telegram is nearly not inifinitely better than WhatsApp.

[-] DrFuggles@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago

Sure, WhatsApp exposes you to US jurisdiction and Meta bullshit. At the same time, Telegram is very friendly with the Kremlin and associated intelligence services. So it basically comes down to whether you want to be spied on by Russian or US entities.

Source: Wired cover story

Wired story from a year ago about the FSB using Telegram to track down political activists.

[-] clot27@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

Thats just speculation. The fact remains most of the Ukrainians (including their president) used telegram to raise their voice.

[-] DrFuggles@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago

If you'd read the linked sources, you'd know that it's not just speculation. Regardless of Telegram's user base, it cooperates with Russian authorities. That remains true whether or not Ukranians use it to communicate. I'm not blaming Telegram for cooperating with Russian authorities as it's well known that not doing so leads to drastic authoritarian measures.

But don't take my word for it: Wikipedia: Blocking of Telegram in Russia

[-] Sal@mander.xyz 5 points 7 months ago

And the audacity to talk about metadata when Telegram accounts still require a phone number today (as they did five years ago when this post was written) is just… 🤯

Not only that, but I believe that they actively try to prevent VoIP numbers from being used to create accounts.

[-] Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

Bravo, bravo, bravo!!

Dude, see you on the same side of the barricades when the time comes to fight the centralized army of agent Smiths 👏👏👏

[-] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I don't agree with everything but that last point of yours. Requiring your phone number only means your are not anonymous. There is no need to be anonymous to communicate privately. In fact, it can be counterproductive, since your are much more vulnerable to social engineering.

[-] Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

And also not secure if somebody sim swapped you, and then your privacy goes into the hands of the FSB agent who sim swapped you

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 months ago
[-] Neon@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Signal is just fine. This with the PhoneNumber is a really stupid hardliner-take.

Something can be private without being anonymous.

[-] lemonuri@lemmy.ml 8 points 7 months ago

Read up on Xmpp or matrix as good alternatives.

[-] Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

Matrix not yet untill they implemented proper encryption and security stuff

SimpleX is pretty cool

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Simplex - requires nothing, just install. But you connect with other people by sending a code outside of SimpleX. Though they've added a directory service for groups.

XMPP

Wire (not Wiremin), though it requires an email account, which is easily addressed with a disposable email.

Signal is very secure from what I've read, despite the phone number identifier.

[-] Dra@lemmy.zip 3 points 7 months ago

Signal is great. Stop being overzealous

this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
81 points (75.8% liked)

Privacy

31122 readers
477 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS