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

Privacy

32177 readers
395 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

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 85 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (12 children)

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.

(β•―Β° Β°οΌ‰β•―οΈ΅ ┻━┻

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

[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 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.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago

Shit, 2019 really was five years ago.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 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 πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 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

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 10 months ago (11 children)

What a load of hipocrisy. The dude uses unauthenticated DH for his apps "secret chats", which a bored student with a laptop can MITM in seconds. Other chats use just TLS, meaning they get to read EVERYTHING.

Use Signal, people.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 10 months ago (2 children)

"Here's what someone who has never created a private messenger thinks about Whatsapp's privacy."

Why would anyone care about what he has to say? πŸ’€

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago

Owned by Facebook, which is a giant US company.

Of fucking course it has backdoors.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I'm confused regarding why you don't consider telegram a private messenger.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's been a while since I looked into it, and things might have changed since then, but some stuff off the top of my head:

  • Messages are stored on the server, not on the device
  • end-to-end encryption not enabled by default
  • uses proprietary encryption, making security audits difficult

Apart from that it's somewhat politically questionable, based in Dubai (I think), with dubious financial backing and Russian developers. Because it's closed source and the encryption is proprietary, there's no way of knowing how much info it leaks.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Messages are stored on the server, not on the device

Yes, pretty much necessary to provide multidevice support

end-to-end encryption not enabled by default

True that and telegram sucks big here, but I donth think e2ee can be enabled in a feasible way for multiple devices.

uses proprietary encryption, making security audits difficult

The MTProto isnt open source but its fully documented, there have been security audits on it.

dubious financial backing

No. Pavel Durov have always said since starting he paid for telegram's servers from his pocket, in recent years telegram has started monetisation programs to cover its costs.

Russian developers

The founders were born in Russia, but they now have dual citizenship of UAE and France. If you are talking about politically questionable, even signal have been accused of having backdoors for CIA.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Clicking the link gives me the following warning:

The site ahead may contain harmful programs

Firefox blocked this page because it might try to trick you into installing programs that harm your browsing experience (for example, by changing your homepage or showing extra ads on sites you visit).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

weird, works for me in firefox with all privacy features enabled, can you please try this link: https://telegra.ph/Why-WhatsApp-Will-Never-Be-Secure-05-15

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

Your original link is blocked at DNS level on my 'Threat intelligence' blocklist.

And that link is blocked at DNS level by 'Toxic' and 'Stop Forum Spam' filters.

So it's blocked before the browser can even connect for me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I got the same warning for the original link with ff as well.

Your comment link didn't throw up a red flag.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (22 children)

WhatsApp's e2e encryption is based on the Signal protocol and active by default. Telegram's is opt-in. So much for Telegram's superior privacy...

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He writes as if signal's devs would have to be quiet about whatsapps encryption

E.g.

Last year, the founders of WhatsApp left the company due to concerns over users’ privacy [16]. They are surely tied by either gag orders or NDAs, so are unable to discuss backdoors publicly without risking their fortunes and freedom. They were able to admit, however, that "they sold their users' privacy" [17].

Yet signal published multiple posts about how secure whatsapp is. I don't buy it but it's not like they would be quiet. (They=moxie) https://signal.org/blog/there-is-no-whatsapp-backdoor/ https://signal.org/blog/whatsapp-complete/

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I believe Moxie helped them integrate Signal protocol into WA successfully while preserving user integrity and privacy.

However, it wouldnt be out of the realm for them to make modifications to their custom protocol that Moxie helped design, and turn it into a privacy nightmare after the fact.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

WhatsApp will be never private and secure, while Telegram will be never private. 😁

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Who said telegram is secure?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (7 children)

No one said the opposite, while on WhatsApp they had several vulnerabilities that allowed attackers to get the user phone control.

An example: https://thehackernews.com/2021/04/new-whatsapp-bug-couldve-let-attackers.html

But there were many more vulnerabilities or "features" that WhatsApp allowed attackers or governments to get into user data. While I haven't read anything about against Telegram security.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

I'm not qualified enough to argue, but I wouldn't trust Durov. He's a competitor, after all. And he has a history of questionable decisions.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This is a very good reminder why one should worry about the new messaging standard for interoperability.

WhatsApp users resilient enough not to fall for constant popups telling them to back up their chats can still be traced by a number of other tricks – from accessing their contacts’ backups to invisible encryption key changes [13]. The metadata generated by WhatsApp users – logs describing who chats with whom and when – is leaked to all kinds of agencies in large volumes by WhatsApp’s parent company [14].

It even might result in me thinking that we should have to ban facebook from entering the fediverse because people are lazy and don't switch to the real fediverse if they can see your posts and contact you directly.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

Guys, please stop using telegram if you care for your security and privacy

Telegram is not fully open source, sometimes they release the source, but the hashes of the builds don't even match (so it's a different source code) 🚩

Zero transparency about data handling, even when they get caught they don't tell details 🚩 (Telegram in the recent years has got really shady reputation)

Very often ways they implement security is weird: non open source app, non open source server, leaking APIs, use of phone numbers, at some point they started asking for an email, non encrypted chats by default, never encrypted group chats.. it can continue forever 🚩

Non-standard encryption is a real red flag, non-open-source 🚩

I know some people that work/worked for the police, and they can read all the messages easy peasy, i was trying to tell to the people many years ago, but everyone was so amused by the stickers. Now you can just read stories of the journalists and activists, and how they got imprisoned with the use telegram πŸ‘οΈβ€πŸ—¨οΈπŸ’€

PLEASE, STOP USING TELEGRAM IF YOU CARE FOR YOUR PRIVACY OR SECURITY

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Both WhatsApp and Telegram suck. Just like any other messenger that's either proprietary or not end to end encrypted. Signal is clearly the best choice.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Signal is not the best choice, it's just a somewhat aceptable middle ground. I prefer something that doesn't require a phone number and something you can self-host, like XMPP.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Good luck convincing normies to use some obscure messaging protocol. It's difficult with Signal, even harder with Matrix, basically impossible with XMPP. 99.99999% have never in their life heard about XMPP. Also most mobile clients absolutely suck. You also can't get proper push notifications without completely ruining your battery life. What a great choice!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I don't see a big difference, the hardest thing by itself is convincing someone to install one more program or app. Also Conversations does not suck.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί