5 ms·

Is not this anti-competitive? Apple prevents Telegram from updating while allowing it to competing messengers. By the way legally Telegram is not a russian com

Is not this anti-competitive? Apple prevents Telegram from updating while allowing it to competing messengers. By the way legally Telegram is not a russian company (British company if I remember correctly) so Apple cannot get away with "who cares, they are from Russia". Is it ok that at Russian government's request American company is restricting a British company?

segmondy 8y ago
Not allowing them to update their app globally is truly evil. Apple has been positioning as a champion of privacy but it's all rubbish. They truly are as bad as Google.
- wpdev_63 8y ago
  It's like the ceo[0] of the world's most profitable company lying[1] to every person in america about their most intimate device they own. I don't care what you say. I don't believe for a second that vault 7 is an exploit and not a built in backdoor. [0]:https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ [1]:https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/ https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/ EDIT - this is going to get downvoted to oblivion cause it goes against the grain but it is an opinion and people should at least be open to it. Especially with the fact that news[2] like this is coming out everyday. [2]:https://www.eff.org/ https://www.eff.org/
  - ryanlol 8y ago
    Uh, so what you’re saying is that you have no idea at all what “vault 7” is?
    - wpdev_63 8y ago
      If you read my link you would see that the fbi,cia, and nsa have "exploits" that they can be used to gain (root)access to iphones,android phones, samsung tvs etc. [hello george orwell] I can't believe for a second that the government can merely send a magic packet to an iphone and have it exploited as it does. It must a built in backdoor they can only access or else alot of other people would have it as well.
      - saagarjha 8y ago
        Essentially everything in that list affects old versions of iOS…
        wpdev_63 8y ago
        Are you seriously doubting they still don't have that type of access?
        saagarjha 8y ago
        …yes?
        wpdev_63 8y ago
        picks up magic eight ball "Will there be another leak of exploits for the latest version of ios in the next year" Shakes magic eight and revealing the answer to be "ARE YOU DAFT! YES!!!" "The magic eight has spoken" putting aside hubris, take a look through eff.org and see for yourself. If you care enough about privacy and the future, take a look at fightforthefuture.org to see which candidates are funding these programs and the ones who are actively fighting the surveillance state.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- ryanlol 8y ago
  Not banning Telegram from the app store is truly evil.
  - IntelMiner 8y ago
    Feel free to extrapolate on this comment...?
    - ryanlol 8y ago
      If you truly value privacy, perhaps you’d ban the “secure messaging” app with a history of obvious crypto backdoors? https://habr.com/post/206900/ https://habr.com/post/206900/ I’d love to see any credible explanation as to how this could have happened by accident.
      - huhtenberg 8y ago
        Have you actually read the post you linked to? He found a flaw, they fixed it. The flaw itself is of a kind common to a home-brewed crypto and it was lying on a surface. Saying that Telegram made this mistake on purpose is, if you pardon my French, making shit up.
        ryanlol 8y ago
        Do you actually understand the nature of the “mistake” they made here? Yes, they fixed it. No, you can’t accidentally write code that pulls DH nonces from your server. >The flaw itself is of a kind common to a home-brewed crypto You can’t say things like this and then proceed to accuse others of making up shit.
        huhtenberg 8y ago
        This is way too crude and obvious to be an intentionally planted protocol weakness. Telegram doesn't have reproducible builds, do they? So if they really wanted to fuck people over, all they had to do is to ship a build that uses predictable PRNG. The vast majority of users will use vendor-supplied binaries, so chances are that for any pair of peers you will be able to fully recover all their secrets and eavesdrop on the traffic. You don't even have to be Telegram to do that. In fact, this works against any protocol... unless client binaries are routinely audited and matched against their source, which is never the case with any of the clients. The only example I am aware of was Zimmerman's PGPfone back in mid-90s. So, yes, I think that you are seeing things that are not there and it's yet another case of stupidity rather than malice on part of Telegram's devs.
- TheForumTroll 8y ago
  >Apple has been positioning as a champion of privacy I wonder who has anything to gain from this position of Apple outside of Apple itself? No one in their right mind can both know Apple's history and believe they are a bastion of privacy. I'd be surprised if they aren't worse than Facebook.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    > No one in their right mind can both know Apple's history and believe they are a bastion of privacy. What history are you referring to?
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > They truly are as bad as Google One of the reasons privacy activism has a hard time getting any traction is because of this all-or-nothing attitude. Apple clearly does more than Google for users’ privacy. But they drop the wall in one case and suddenly they’re “truly as bad as Google.” All-or-nothing hardball works if one has leverage. (Even then, it is a costly strategy.) If one is in the minority, however, it virtually guarantees being ignored. The world exists in shades of grey.
  - zzzcpan 8y ago
    I'd say they do as little as possible to keep the privacy PR going. It's more than Google, but still very very little.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > It's more than Google, but still very very little Perfect is the enemy of good. My point is it’s possible to criticise a company without being (falsely) hyperbolic.

segmondy 8y ago

Not allowing them to update their app globally is truly evil. Apple has been positioning as a champion of privacy but it's all rubbish. They truly are as bad as Google.

wpdev_63 8y ago
It's like the ceo[0] of the world's most profitable company lying[1] to every person in america about their most intimate device they own. I don't care what you say. I don't believe for a second that vault 7 is an exploit and not a built in backdoor. [0]:https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ [1]:https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/ https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/ EDIT - this is going to get downvoted to oblivion cause it goes against the grain but it is an opinion and people should at least be open to it. Especially with the fact that news[2] like this is coming out everyday. [2]:https://www.eff.org/ https://www.eff.org/
- ryanlol 8y ago
  Uh, so what you’re saying is that you have no idea at all what “vault 7” is?
  - wpdev_63 8y ago
    If you read my link you would see that the fbi,cia, and nsa have "exploits" that they can be used to gain (root)access to iphones,android phones, samsung tvs etc. [hello george orwell] I can't believe for a second that the government can merely send a magic packet to an iphone and have it exploited as it does. It must a built in backdoor they can only access or else alot of other people would have it as well.
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      Essentially everything in that list affects old versions of iOS…
      - wpdev_63 8y ago
        Are you seriously doubting they still don't have that type of access?
        saagarjha 8y ago
        …yes?
        wpdev_63 8y ago
        picks up magic eight ball "Will there be another leak of exploits for the latest version of ios in the next year" Shakes magic eight and revealing the answer to be "ARE YOU DAFT! YES!!!" "The magic eight has spoken" putting aside hubris, take a look through eff.org and see for yourself. If you care enough about privacy and the future, take a look at fightforthefuture.org to see which candidates are funding these programs and the ones who are actively fighting the surveillance state.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
ryanlol 8y ago
Not banning Telegram from the app store is truly evil.
- IntelMiner 8y ago
  Feel free to extrapolate on this comment...?
  - ryanlol 8y ago
    If you truly value privacy, perhaps you’d ban the “secure messaging” app with a history of obvious crypto backdoors? https://habr.com/post/206900/ https://habr.com/post/206900/ I’d love to see any credible explanation as to how this could have happened by accident.
    - huhtenberg 8y ago
      Have you actually read the post you linked to? He found a flaw, they fixed it. The flaw itself is of a kind common to a home-brewed crypto and it was lying on a surface. Saying that Telegram made this mistake on purpose is, if you pardon my French, making shit up.
      - ryanlol 8y ago
        Do you actually understand the nature of the “mistake” they made here? Yes, they fixed it. No, you can’t accidentally write code that pulls DH nonces from your server. >The flaw itself is of a kind common to a home-brewed crypto You can’t say things like this and then proceed to accuse others of making up shit.
        huhtenberg 8y ago
        This is way too crude and obvious to be an intentionally planted protocol weakness. Telegram doesn't have reproducible builds, do they? So if they really wanted to fuck people over, all they had to do is to ship a build that uses predictable PRNG. The vast majority of users will use vendor-supplied binaries, so chances are that for any pair of peers you will be able to fully recover all their secrets and eavesdrop on the traffic. You don't even have to be Telegram to do that. In fact, this works against any protocol... unless client binaries are routinely audited and matched against their source, which is never the case with any of the clients. The only example I am aware of was Zimmerman's PGPfone back in mid-90s. So, yes, I think that you are seeing things that are not there and it's yet another case of stupidity rather than malice on part of Telegram's devs.
TheForumTroll 8y ago
>Apple has been positioning as a champion of privacy I wonder who has anything to gain from this position of Apple outside of Apple itself? No one in their right mind can both know Apple's history and believe they are a bastion of privacy. I'd be surprised if they aren't worse than Facebook.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  > No one in their right mind can both know Apple's history and believe they are a bastion of privacy. What history are you referring to?
JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> They truly are as bad as Google One of the reasons privacy activism has a hard time getting any traction is because of this all-or-nothing attitude. Apple clearly does more than Google for users’ privacy. But they drop the wall in one case and suddenly they’re “truly as bad as Google.” All-or-nothing hardball works if one has leverage. (Even then, it is a costly strategy.) If one is in the minority, however, it virtually guarantees being ignored. The world exists in shades of grey.
- zzzcpan 8y ago
  I'd say they do as little as possible to keep the privacy PR going. It's more than Google, but still very very little.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > It's more than Google, but still very very little Perfect is the enemy of good. My point is it’s possible to criticise a company without being (falsely) hyperbolic.