6 ms·

I read the WP article you cited, titled, "The secret American origins of Telegram, the encrypted messaging app favored by the Islamic State". If Telegram isn't

I read the WP article you cited, titled, "The secret American origins of Telegram, the encrypted messaging app favored by the Islamic State". If Telegram isn't that secure, then why are extremists like IS using it over Signal or WhatsApp? I know Telegram has better features for big groups and much better multi-platform support, so is that the reason? I'm legitimately asking without any snark.

kasey_junk 9y ago
Because they have fallen for the marketing hype and are not secure messaging systems experts? We know some extremists still use SMS which is definitely not secure. Also, is there evidence that extremists aren't using Signal and WhatsApp?
- skinnymuch 9y ago
  Them falling for the marketing makes sense.
atmosx 9y ago
You highly overestimate the people who are in position of power. I am talking about politicians, head of terrorist groups, etc. While saying that top politicians are complete idiots is probably wrong - then again maybe not, I am not sure anymore - the fact that H. Clinton, run the most expensive campaign in history, with backing from all major tech corps AND her staff didn't bother to use encryption at any scale, let alone running a mail server (God knows what kind of software the server was running if it was OpenBSD or Windows Server 08), to me says a lot about how flawed the understanding of these people and their consultant's is about today's world. Watching "House of Cards" everybody seems incredibly smart, driven, etc. but the politicians I see in real life on average and on the not-very-smart side and the few I've met in person are clueless beyond salvation. Ps. Sorry for possible mistakes, I'm reading from mobile.
- jliptzin 9y ago
  Over 99% of people have no clue how computers work in the most basic sense of the word understanding and most are proud of their ignorance.
- michaelbuckbee 9y ago
  I've always heard that while House of Cards might be more "serious" that Veep is actually much closer to real life. Veep has politicians making stupid mistakes on Twitter. Life and death decisions decided on a whims and just absurd amounts of pettiness.
- marek995 9y ago
  I think "Borgen" is far more realistic when it comes to politics, the "shadow play" and intricacies
- skinnymuch 9y ago
  Haha good points. Thankfully savvier viewers and/or just people in general know House of Cards is all show and not realistic even though it acts like it is with its seriousness.
permanentdecaf 9y ago
Marketing. Sadly, one of the conclusions you can draw from Telegram is that a security business is almost better off with no security. Pavel Durov says that Telegram is "heavily" encrypted over and over again, journalists who don't know better take that at face value and encode it into every headline ("Telegram, the encrypted messaging app, ..."), and meanwhile since there is no encryption there is no risk of anyone finding or publishing vulnerabilities in it. Since cryptography already seems unreal to most people (and is always just a matter of getting the smart IT guy to 'crack' it on television), everyone's already predisposed to thinking that security = Switzerland. Unless there's a major change, the charlatans will win every time.
ycmbntrthrwaway 9y ago
Telegram offers at least some degree of anonymity, you can join group chat without exposing your phone number. And even if telegram administration closes the group, they are unlikely to report all members to police. WhatsApp and Signal offer non-anonymous groups only. They are probably used by people who already know each other.

kasey_junk 9y ago

Because they have fallen for the marketing hype and are not secure messaging systems experts? We know some extremists still use SMS which is definitely not secure. Also, is there evidence that extremists aren't using Signal and WhatsApp?

skinnymuch 9y ago
Them falling for the marketing makes sense.

atmosx 9y ago

You highly overestimate the people who are in position of power. I am talking about politicians, head of terrorist groups, etc. While saying that top politicians are complete idiots is probably wrong - then again maybe not, I am not sure anymore - the fact that H. Clinton, run the most expensive campaign in history, with backing from all major tech corps AND her staff didn't bother to use encryption at any scale, let alone running a mail server (God knows what kind of software the server was running if it was OpenBSD or Windows Server 08), to me says a lot about how flawed the understanding of these people and their consultant's is about today's world. Watching "House of Cards" everybody seems incredibly smart, driven, etc. but the politicians I see in real life on average and on the not-very-smart side and the few I've met in person are clueless beyond salvation. Ps. Sorry for possible mistakes, I'm reading from mobile.

jliptzin 9y ago
Over 99% of people have no clue how computers work in the most basic sense of the word understanding and most are proud of their ignorance.
michaelbuckbee 9y ago
I've always heard that while House of Cards might be more "serious" that Veep is actually much closer to real life. Veep has politicians making stupid mistakes on Twitter. Life and death decisions decided on a whims and just absurd amounts of pettiness.
marek995 9y ago
I think "Borgen" is far more realistic when it comes to politics, the "shadow play" and intricacies
skinnymuch 9y ago
Haha good points. Thankfully savvier viewers and/or just people in general know House of Cards is all show and not realistic even though it acts like it is with its seriousness.

permanentdecaf 9y ago

Marketing. Sadly, one of the conclusions you can draw from Telegram is that a security business is almost better off with no security. Pavel Durov says that Telegram is "heavily" encrypted over and over again, journalists who don't know better take that at face value and encode it into every headline ("Telegram, the encrypted messaging app, ..."), and meanwhile since there is no encryption there is no risk of anyone finding or publishing vulnerabilities in it. Since cryptography already seems unreal to most people (and is always just a matter of getting the smart IT guy to 'crack' it on television), everyone's already predisposed to thinking that security = Switzerland. Unless there's a major change, the charlatans will win every time.

ycmbntrthrwaway 9y ago

Telegram offers at least some degree of anonymity, you can join group chat without exposing your phone number. And even if telegram administration closes the group, they are unlikely to report all members to police. WhatsApp and Signal offer non-anonymous groups only. They are probably used by people who already know each other.