5 ms·

Brazilian here. I've always used Telegram for privacy purposes. It was amazing to watch the flood of friends "just signing up".

jaflo 10y ago
Although it has to be said that Telegram does not offer true end-to-end encryption by default. For general-purpose usage, WhatsApp may actually be considered more secure than Telegram.
- twoarray 10y ago
  Indeed Telegram is not more secure than WhatsApp, but I usually take into account the position of each company and how that affects my particular use case.
  - free2rhyme214 10y ago
    Telegram secure chats are more secure than Whatsapp's recent encryption because the code is open source.
    - jaflo 10y ago
      While it is true that Telegram's clients are open-sourced, their server-side code is not. So we don't know how information is stored on the server (I do not think that it is encrypted).
      - lucb1e 10y ago
        Closed source servers are no problem in verifying E2E encryption if the client is open source. Whatsapp's issue is that the clients are closed source. Telegram's issue is that it's optional to encrypt your messages. That's the long and short of this whole Whatsapp versus Telegram discussion.
    - MrMullen 10y ago
      Whatapp's uses the Signal Protocol Java, which is open source. https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepaper.pdf https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepap... https://github.com/WhisperSystems/libsignal-protocol-java https://github.com/WhisperSystems/libsignal-protocol-java
      - Spivak 10y ago
        Oh ffs, here we go again. Yes, the signal protocol and signal's implementation are both open source, but you have no way to actually verify that WA has actually implemented the protocol correctly and securely. Sure you could do some basic packet analysis but this wouldn't tell you about the presence of any remotely triggered backdoors. The only way for you as a user to actually verify the security is by reading the source and compiling the software yourself, or reading the source and verifying the signature via reproducible builds. I really don't understand the business decision process here. If they just copied Signal with OSS/FOSS code and reproducible builds they would just win outright and tech people wouldn't have anything to complain about. The value of the service is the network anyway -- why care so much about the client?
        MrMullen 10y ago
        There are many ways that both WA and Telegram can be subverted/backdoored/messed up. What it really comes down to, is who do you trust? Do you trust WA or Telegram? Personally, I trust WA a lot more than Telegram since WA has Moxie on their team and Telegram says, "Trust us" and a very unreasonable security challenge. I naturally don't trust people that say "Trust us" and put up unreasonable security challenges.
        alias240 10y ago
        WhatsApp are owned by a company that is known to cooperate with PRISM. For that reason, I can't trust them.
        free2rhyme214 10y ago
        This.
abritinthebay 10y ago
But... Telegram isn't E2E encrypted so is less private..? I mean, it's not blocked so I guess it's better than nothing but it's not a plus for privacy: it's a net negative.
- free2rhyme214 10y ago
  Telegram's secret chats are E2E encrypted.
  - MrMullen 10y ago
    Using an unexamined and unpublished encryption algorithm. Encryption is hard and when someone says "trust us", you know they are implementing poor encryption.
    - lucb1e 10y ago
      If you think everything has to be "published" in the sense of a publication in a scientific paper, hacker news is probably a disappointing place. As for unexamined, the bounty for actually cracking the encryption is still open last I heard, and I know people have been trying. As someone professionally involved in cyber security, I fully understand and agree with the criticism that the protocol is non-standard and does not follow several best practices. On the other hand, it cannot be ignored that it hasn't been cracked yet, despite Telegram being one of the bigger messaging services in the world (especially one attracting a tech-savvy audience) and receiving a lot of attention. The very least Telegram-haters could do is acknowledge Whatsapp's equally big problem: we cannot verify a thing. Facebok could have either open sourced the clients or published the outer shell of the wire protocol so we can verify the E2E encryption. They chose to do neither.

jaflo 10y ago

Although it has to be said that Telegram does not offer true end-to-end encryption by default. For general-purpose usage, WhatsApp may actually be considered more secure than Telegram.

twoarray 10y ago
Indeed Telegram is not more secure than WhatsApp, but I usually take into account the position of each company and how that affects my particular use case.
- free2rhyme214 10y ago
  Telegram secure chats are more secure than Whatsapp's recent encryption because the code is open source.
  - jaflo 10y ago
    While it is true that Telegram's clients are open-sourced, their server-side code is not. So we don't know how information is stored on the server (I do not think that it is encrypted).
    - lucb1e 10y ago
      Closed source servers are no problem in verifying E2E encryption if the client is open source. Whatsapp's issue is that the clients are closed source. Telegram's issue is that it's optional to encrypt your messages. That's the long and short of this whole Whatsapp versus Telegram discussion.
  - MrMullen 10y ago
    Whatapp's uses the Signal Protocol Java, which is open source. https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepaper.pdf https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepap... https://github.com/WhisperSystems/libsignal-protocol-java https://github.com/WhisperSystems/libsignal-protocol-java
    - Spivak 10y ago
      Oh ffs, here we go again. Yes, the signal protocol and signal's implementation are both open source, but you have no way to actually verify that WA has actually implemented the protocol correctly and securely. Sure you could do some basic packet analysis but this wouldn't tell you about the presence of any remotely triggered backdoors. The only way for you as a user to actually verify the security is by reading the source and compiling the software yourself, or reading the source and verifying the signature via reproducible builds. I really don't understand the business decision process here. If they just copied Signal with OSS/FOSS code and reproducible builds they would just win outright and tech people wouldn't have anything to complain about. The value of the service is the network anyway -- why care so much about the client?
      - MrMullen 10y ago
        There are many ways that both WA and Telegram can be subverted/backdoored/messed up. What it really comes down to, is who do you trust? Do you trust WA or Telegram? Personally, I trust WA a lot more than Telegram since WA has Moxie on their team and Telegram says, "Trust us" and a very unreasonable security challenge. I naturally don't trust people that say "Trust us" and put up unreasonable security challenges.
        alias240 10y ago
        WhatsApp are owned by a company that is known to cooperate with PRISM. For that reason, I can't trust them.
      - free2rhyme214 10y ago
        This.

abritinthebay 10y ago

But... Telegram isn't E2E encrypted so is less private..? I mean, it's not blocked so I guess it's better than nothing but it's not a plus for privacy: it's a net negative.

free2rhyme214 10y ago
Telegram's secret chats are E2E encrypted.
- MrMullen 10y ago
  Using an unexamined and unpublished encryption algorithm. Encryption is hard and when someone says "trust us", you know they are implementing poor encryption.
  - lucb1e 10y ago
    If you think everything has to be "published" in the sense of a publication in a scientific paper, hacker news is probably a disappointing place. As for unexamined, the bounty for actually cracking the encryption is still open last I heard, and I know people have been trying. As someone professionally involved in cyber security, I fully understand and agree with the criticism that the protocol is non-standard and does not follow several best practices. On the other hand, it cannot be ignored that it hasn't been cracked yet, despite Telegram being one of the bigger messaging services in the world (especially one attracting a tech-savvy audience) and receiving a lot of attention. The very least Telegram-haters could do is acknowledge Whatsapp's equally big problem: we cannot verify a thing. Facebok could have either open sourced the clients or published the outer shell of the wire protocol so we can verify the E2E encryption. They chose to do neither.