• MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Sure its is. Russia has the keys so they can snoop. Its encrypted though so just the kremlin can read it. Enjoy.

    • iagomago@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Durov has been blacklisted in Russia because he refused to cooperate with Putin’s government on several occasions.

        • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          It was “blocked” for 2 years, though there was a problem accessing it for only a month or so as Telegram developers implemented ways to avoid the ban. In 2 years the government officials decided that Telegram made enough effort to block extremist materials to remove themselves from the embarrassment. Now they probably think “why didn’t we trick Durov to visit us and just arrest him like France did”.

          • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            23 days ago

            I am fairly convinced that it was either theater from the beginning, or some agreement was reached before it was “unblocked”. RKN doesn’t care about “embarrassment” or collateral damage if they want to do something.

              • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                23 days ago

                Telegram is VERY popular there. What it has to offer are users who would see ads and pay for the subscription.

                • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  23 days ago

                  But the ban was only somewhat effective for like a month, then Telegram found a way to avoid it. In two years no one even felt like it was banned. So what could Russia offer to Telegram? Literally nothing.

  • Noxy@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    25 days ago

    When you can’t use secret chat at ALL on desktop, fuck no it isn’t.

    Assuming end-to-end encryption is what’s meant in the question.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      25 days ago

      As a kind of a weird bonus, activating end-to-end encryption in Telegram is oddly difficult for non-expert users to actually do.

      No, it’s not. It’s very easy. In the bottom right corner there is a pencil button to compose a new message and right there it asks which tpye of chat to start. Secret chat is the second topmost option after group chat. Really not hidden or complicated at all.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        25 days ago

        It should be a setting to always use encrypted chat, and it should probably prompt you when you first login.

        Better yet, don’t have an option to not have encrypted chats. I don’t see a reason to not have everything E2EE all the time.

        • Kekzkrieger@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          its some message for the users, having a secret chat kinda sounds bad, like doing something illegal and guilt trapping users into not using it

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          25 days ago

          It should be a setting to always use encrypted chat, and it should probably prompt you when you first login.

          I don’t disagree but the claim that you quoted was that it’s complicated to initiate and as I explained it’s not. Also secret chats stay in the messages list, so you can go back to an initiated secret chat and pick up there without any additional fiddling.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            25 days ago

            If you have to enable it every time, it’s complicated enough that most people won’t bother. Maybe they’ll do it once or twice out of novelty, but it’s not going to become a habit.

            I only consider something “encrypted” if it’s actually encrypted by default, or at least prompts to enable it permanently on first launch. Otherwise, it’s not an “encrypted” chat, it just has the option to have some chats encrypted.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              25 days ago

              If you have to enable it every time, it’s complicated

              But you don’t. As I already explained: secret chats stay in the messages list, so you can go back to an initiated secret chat and pick up there without any additional fiddling.

              I have plenty of encrypted chats that I don’t have to enable every time I want to send one. I don’t understand where this misconception comes from.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                25 days ago

                Surely you talk to more than one or two people, no? If you have to manually check a box or something every time you start a new message with someone, people are going to stop doing it.

                It’s not an encrypted chat app. It’s an unencrypted chat app that has an option for encrypted chats. Whether something is encrypted or not depends on how most people use it and what the defaults are.

                Signal is an encrypted chat app. E2EE is the default and AFAIK only behavior. Telegram can be encrypted, but it’s not by default, and defaults matter.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  25 days ago

                  Surely you talk to more than one or two people, no? If you have to manually check a box or something every time you start a new message with someone, people are going to stop doing it.

                  Maybe you get acquainted to 100 new people every day, so your day is a constant chore of starting secret chats all the time. I don’t. I doubt regular people do. Just start the secret chat once and then pick it up later.

                  Signal is an encrypted chat app.

                  Except for the locally stored data which is not encrypted and Signal’s attitude is that device encryption is up to the user.

          • brrt@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            25 days ago

            Is it more complicated to achieve than in other e2ee messengers? Yes, thus saying it is complicated is justified.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          As I understand it, public groups use server side encryption (so not robust), but private chats use e2e encryption that is client side. (More robust)

        • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          I don’t see a reason to not have everything E2EE all the time.

          You probably didn’t ever meet non-IT person(or most of the IT people). To use e2ee means you need to keep your private key close and safe. 99.999% people can’t do that. So when they lost their key their conversation history is gone and it’s your fault not theirs.

        • oktoberpaard@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          They’ve implemented it in such a way that you only have access to an encrypted chat on a single device, so no syncing between devices. Syncing E2EE chats across devices is more difficult to pull off, but it’s definitely possible and other services do that by default.

          • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            24 days ago

            Syncing E2EE chats across devices is more difficult to pull off, but it’s definitely possible and other services do that by default.

            That’s because if you are able to get your private key on another device, then Google, Apple or Microsoft, and that means anyone, also have access to your private key. And you don’t have e2ee, literally.

            • oktoberpaard@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              24 days ago

              I would look into how Matrix handles this, for example. It involves unique device keys, device verification from a trusted device, and cross-signing. It’s not just some private key that’s spread around to random new devices where you lose track of.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        25 days ago

        Encryption is part of defense strategy, otherwise it’s like a steel door in a house with wall panels made of paper.

        That strategy involves all communications being encrypted. Otherwise rubber hose cryptanalysis becomes practical.

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            24 days ago

            People understand when I explain three clicks.

            This is the problem. You have to explain it. Feel like talking to several million people to get them to use it?

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              24 days ago

              Feel like talking to several million people to get them to use it?

              I already made a one-line excessive tutorial in another comment. Feel free to link it.

              • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                24 days ago

                Maybe when you share it, and explain, and be ready to support the millions of users, then we’ll have e2ee. But even then we probably won’t.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  24 days ago

                  Maybe when you share it

                  I already did.

                  and explain

                  I already did.

                  and be ready to support the millions of users

                  Of course. As I already explained, this sort of thing is my job. Millions of people signing support contracts with me: Awesome! I’ll be creating so many jobs. Happy to expand into enterprise communication by offering Teamgram hosting services.

        • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          The encryption algorithm may be open source, but they rolled it themselves. It is proprietary encryption.

          • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            24 days ago

            Again, it’s not, go to their github, check the code of the client, compile it yourself, and make a reproducible build to check that the client they ship to your phone is the same. You are talking nonsense.

            • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              24 days ago

              You’re not getting what I’m saying, because you don’t understand what “proprietary” means in this context.

              Proprietary encryption ≠ Proprietary code.

              You can roll your own shitty novel encryption algorithm and license it under GPL if you want, it’s still proprietary encryption in that Signal has its own unvetted encryption algorithm instead of using a trusted existing algorithm.

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Oh here we go.

    Manufacturing Consent to tear it down because victims around the world use it to get their voices out when everything else is shut down. People organizing against oppressive governments using it when nothing else is safe.

    It can’t be allowed to exist. This is them social engineering your acceptance of their tyranny. Don’t bite the bait.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      What is this nonsense? This is a technical post explaining why it’s not encrypted.

      Plus there’s plenty of time other services like matrix which can do the same thing better without enriching a billionaire

  • undrivendev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    One of the most important rules of cybersecurity is: never roll your own encryption.

    And what did the guys at Telegram do? Rolled their own encryption.

    If you are into Telegram because you think it’s secure, think again. There are much better alternatives out there, adopting proved industry standards. Signal or Matrix just to name a few.

    • endofline@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      No, it’s not the rule itself. It’s rather an advice not to do as rolling own crypto is very tricky and complicated thing. You have to be very aware of many possible attacks, how they do work, to create own crypto properly

      • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        More like “don’t roll your own crypto unless you’re ready to spend years getting it scrutinized and polished”.

      • lichengeese@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        ‘Rolling your own…’ is a comparison to rolling your own cigarettes. That is, creating your own version from scratch instead of using something ready-made.