“Telegram is not a private messenger. There’s nothing private about it. It’s the opposite. It’s a cloud messenger where every message you’ve ever sent or received is in plain text in a database that Telegram the organization controls and has access to it”

“It’s like a Russian oligarch starting an unencrypted version of WhatsApp, a pixel for pixel clone of WhatsApp. That should be kind of a difficult brand to operate. Somehow, they’ve done a really amazing job of convincing the whole world that this is an encrypted messaging app and that the founder is some kind of Russian dissident, even though he goes there once a month, the whole team lives in Russia, and their families are there.”

" What happened in France is they just chose not to respond to the subpoena. So that’s in violation of the law. And, he gets arrested in France, right? And everyone’s like, oh, France. But I think the key point is they have the data, like they can respond to the subpoenas where as Signal, for instance, doesn’t have access to the data and couldn’t respond to that same request.  To me it’s very obvious that Russia would’ve had a much less polite version of that conversation with Pavel Durov and the telegram team before this moment"

  • disconnectikacio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Telegram is used by Ukrainian armed forces for military actions, ruskie pests use it too for the same… so its probably hard to hack, as these REALLY want to see the messages of each other…

    Signal is a crap, if you really want a surely private thing, you should use decentralised things, like matrix, or even serverless things like tox.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      Telegram is used by Ukrainian armed forces for military actions, ruskie pests use it too for the same… so its probably hard to hack, as these REALLY want to see the messages of each other…

      You see, these arguments are just impolite when made against the man in the post going out of his way to provide you with an experiment based on logic that you don’t need computer science knowledge to verify.

      As far as I have heard, Ukrainian servicemen are forbidden to use Telegram. Ukrainian civilians do, and Ukrainian special services might do that sometimes perhaps.

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I predict yet another Signal-related hack within the month.

  • blueberry_793@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    11 hours ago

    What is not mentioned… there’s no privacy when the device itself is compromised. For instance, Android phones can read and phone home data from your notifications. In that case, any messenger app wouldn’t be private from Google’s eyes.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 minutes ago

      There’s a commonly used Russian metaphor “to not see the forest behind the trees”.

      What you are calling a device is in fact a system. It’s a local system, that you are carrying in your hand, but it’s functioning due to a very complex global system which is not. That device in itself is like a 1960s’ town in complexity. In itself, but there’s also the global system.

      And these are a result of quite a lot of people employed by various organizations with hierarchies and dependencies. And most of the power in those organizations doesn’t want you to have privacy and autonomy as much and when you want. If you want those, you should produce your own hardware and everything above it. Or build organizations interested in your full privacy and autonomy which will do that. It’s about structure, so just creating a few of them (a goal hardly reachable in itself) with manifests saying “we want to be good” won’t change anything.

      So, if you were wondering why contemporaries of Stalin’s regime were reluctant to divorce it with Marxism and call it something else, - that’s similar to this. They really wanted to believe there’s a Marxist superpower, just like some people wanted to believe Google is a good corporation, and before that some people wanted to believe Apple is a counterculture corporation, and so on. And, at various moments in time and space, in various dimensions, sometimes these were. Just like in some ways the British Empire was really bringing civilization to the world.

      The more life and diversity there is, the likelier we are to have good things. That doesn’t mean we’ll ever have full privacy, full autonomy, fully civilized, peaceful and honorable world, and so on. We won’t.

    • IratePirate@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 hours ago

      …and once you get to “AI” with system level access that is supposed to scan for “bad content” (like with Apple’s supposed “CSAM scanning” and Google’s Android System Safety Core), all bets are off.

      All of the major platforms owned by corporations (including Apple) are or will be compromised.

      The only way out is degoogled Android (for now) or, better, a true Linux device.

  • FoundFootFootage78@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 hours ago

    It should be the law that any information a online service collects about it’s users should be given to the government immediately and unconditionally, then suddenly people will start really caring about how much information a service has access to.

    • Bongles@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 hours ago

      then suddenly people will start really caring about how much information a service has access to

      I sincerely doubt it. The majority of people will accept that this is just “how it is” and will move on with life. After all, they’re not doing anything wrong.

      • fxdave@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I agree, if majority of people would care, Linux PCs would be the most popular option. They care about convenience only, but not even that much. Instead of researching the best they are just ok with the advertised options. They eat what they get.

  • Kailn@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    As much as I’d like to favor foss and federated messenger apps, telegram isn’t as much garbage as whatsapp:

    1.The client is somewhat open source and have forks like Forkgram, Materialgram and unoffical clients like Telegrand.
    2. Telegram isn’t E2EE by default but at least it doesn’t lie about it and have E2EE secret chat when nessesary, that means crucial chats stay on your device and the rest stay on their database recoverable and syncable across devices.
    (Yes, whatsapp supposedly is E2EE but we can’t know for sure, it’s closed-source.)
    3. You can use telegram as a cloud service with only 2GB per file limit, unlike whatsapp.
    (There’s even a third-party app that utilise this as a cloud gallery.)
    4. Even tho telegram has ads in large channels, telegram isn’t funded by a greedy big-corp and it doesn’t datamine you, ads are based on the channel’s topic.

    Yes, in terms of privacy, telegram isn’t the best option, Signal, Session, XMPP, Matrix, or SimpleX have better privacy features, less linkability and E2EE by default but telegram is very mainstream and got more publicity, making it the whatsapp alternative it advertises itself as-is.
    Publicity doesn’t make a better messenger app, but for what it tries to do, it’s adoptable for simple users, doubles as cloud storage and is more secure than the garbage being whatsapp.

    Immigrating users to different apps is a headache on it’s own, but if they know of telegram and it’s not privacy invasive, that’s not bad.

      • Kailn@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Yes, but how would you know Meta doesn’t have a copy of your encryption key (ex: when you sign up) and keeps a copy of your encrypted messages somewhere?
        AFAIK your encryption key resides as whatsapp’s data folder but since whatsapp is closed-source you can’t guarantee that whatsapp gave the encryption key to Meta’s server at some point when it was created; (or it was created on their servers and sent to your device.)

        One would just assume the encryption key is made on your device and never sent to Meta and all the E2EE messages aren’t kept on Meta’s server after they are sent.

        Again, Meta is a company that is profiting on targeted advetising and selling user data, how would whatsapp be a free service without any profit?

        Also, Here’s someone who saw their whatsapp chat used for targeted ads on them in case you have doubt.

        • Etzello@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Yeah don’t get me wrong, I despise meta and their facade pretending WhatsApp is private. Your example is evidence but not proof but it does not mean I doubt you because it really doesn’t surprise me. Gmail likes to pretend it’s secure and private too because data in transit is supposedly encrypted but they can still just read absolutely everything in your inbox themselves

  • IratePirate@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Where I am, Telegram is mainly used by alt- und far right figures close to Russia. Facts don’t matter in these circles any more. Feelings do. And Durov knows how to manage those.

    • ChristchurchAsshole@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      These people are foolish to use telegram, it’s just a plain-text unencrypted app. Plus there’s scams and spam all the time on telegram but not on signal.

  • brownsugga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    14 hours ago

    His NAME is MARLINSPIKE?? Like the ancestral home of Captain Haddock from Tintin?! We really are living in a simulation

      • untorquer@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        17 hours ago

        No, both. The interviewer seems extra comfortable at the start but by the end they both seem on the same level. I think in a good way, not sure it’s a good method to get a read on either of them if i know my friends 😆

  • egrets@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    19 hours ago

    They’ve done a really amazing job of convincing the world that this is an encrypted messaging app.

    This is a play on people’s naivety. It is an encrypted messaging app in as much as regular messages are encrypted between the client and the server. It’s just that this achieves nothing for the user in terms of privacy unless you can both completely trust the provider (you shouldn’t) and be confident that the back-end can’t be compromised (you can’t).

    They do also have “secret chats” that are apparently E2E encrypted, but you’d be mad at this point to give them the benefit of the doubt without at least looking at independent security audits of the client.

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I don’t think, at this point, people who use Telegram do it for their privacy. I still use it, but I don’t trust it one bit more than I trust WhatsApp.