3 ms·

1) They have software for other phones and desktop computers. Others can use those without having to buy Blackphone. Assuming the hardware does confer some secu

by Canada 11y ago

1) They have software for other phones and desktop computers. Others can use those without having to buy Blackphone. Assuming the hardware does confer some security advantage, talking to people who just have the software won't negate the security advantage gained for communication between users do have the hardware. 2) Fair point. 3) Telegram is also a central service, so in that respect it's no better than Silent Circle. WhisperSystems is better in that they make some server source code public. But to be fair to Silent Circle, their offer is much more complete: Voice, Messaging, Encrypted contact storage, and outbound PSTN access. 4) By using SILC, Tor, or GPG broadcasts the fact that you value privacy, which could make you a higher priority. What are you going to do, just send everything in cleartext and hope nobody looks?

dijit 11y ago
1) I was not made aware of this, but that's good. 3) my point was that telegram was "no better" but has better market penetration, while being essentially the same thing.. why have more standards. 4) this is also true, but it's less real world advertising of that fact, you don't order tor, you don't order GPG, and you don't have a physical device which proudly announces that you do. If you're doing security online right, nobody can tell you're doing it at a glance.
- Canada 11y ago
  3) Leaving aside the lack of voice support in Telegram and considering only messaging: Both SCIMP (Silent Circle) and TextSecure/Axolotl (WhisperSystems) are better protocols than MTProto (Telegram). 4) You order a privacy tool from Amazon, and you're put on a list. You emit the kind of encrypted traffic that 99% of internet users don't, you also get put on a list. In most cases, there's no difference. I suppose if your threat model requires you physically appear not to care about privacy then it matters. Like maybe you work in a sensitive position and you don't want anyone to think you might exfiltrate data, so you only carry the work provisioned device which logs everything you do.
  - kristofferR 11y ago
    4) Yeah, it's such a massive shame that Android/Google doesn't have end-to-end encryption between all users enabled as a default, like iOS has with iMessage.

by Canada 11y ago

dijit 11y ago

1) I was not made aware of this, but that's good. 3) my point was that telegram was "no better" but has better market penetration, while being essentially the same thing.. why have more standards. 4) this is also true, but it's less real world advertising of that fact, you don't order tor, you don't order GPG, and you don't have a physical device which proudly announces that you do. If you're doing security online right, nobody can tell you're doing it at a glance.

Canada 11y ago
3) Leaving aside the lack of voice support in Telegram and considering only messaging: Both SCIMP (Silent Circle) and TextSecure/Axolotl (WhisperSystems) are better protocols than MTProto (Telegram). 4) You order a privacy tool from Amazon, and you're put on a list. You emit the kind of encrypted traffic that 99% of internet users don't, you also get put on a list. In most cases, there's no difference. I suppose if your threat model requires you physically appear not to care about privacy then it matters. Like maybe you work in a sensitive position and you don't want anyone to think you might exfiltrate data, so you only carry the work provisioned device which logs everything you do.
- kristofferR 11y ago
  4) Yeah, it's such a massive shame that Android/Google doesn't have end-to-end encryption between all users enabled as a default, like iOS has with iMessage.