3 ms·
> there are certainly better apps privacy-wise out there With significantly worse UX. > still has no E2E encryption by default This doesn't make it not reas
by solarkraft 6y ago
> there are certainly better apps privacy-wise out there
With significantly worse UX.
> still has no E2E encryption by default
This doesn't make it not reasonably secure in my mind. While the TG people will be able to access your messages, they can also process them, making stuff like large groups even possible (imagine the distribution hell otherwise).
I do tend to think that there's not much of a down side to E2E for private chats though, since you can still share private keys between devices to enable sync.
> So it's worth nothing if no one use it.
Telegram is way more than secret chats.
- jolux 6y ago> This doesn't make it not reasonably secure in my mind. While the TG people will be able to access your messages, they can also process them, making stuff like large groups even possible (imagine the distribution hell otherwise). So your standard for “reasonably secure” communications is Facebook Messenger?
- solarkraft 6y agoNo. You're using the same "if it's not perfect it's worthless" argumentation as GP. It's not perfect, nothing is. But it makes better compromises than others.
- jolux 6y agoIt’s worthless as a “secure messenger.” They can read and store all the messages unless you use the E2E mode.