3 ms·

That's exactly why you want to use something like Telegram if you're in the West: it's not controlled by a Western government. I don't care much for the conspi

That's exactly why you want to use something like Telegram if you're in the West: it's not controlled by a Western government. I don't care much for the conspiracy nuts, but their ability to communicate with each other would surely have been terminated had they used WhatsApp. It's fine to use WhatsApp to praise Obama, Merkel or anything else that is widely accepted in your society etc, but it's a terrible choice if you're on the shit list of the government.

mschuster91 6y ago
You can do whatever you want using Whatsapp (it has a proven solid e2e encryption), the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole. If it were that easy to influence Whatsapp, India would not have a real problem with Whatsapp-mobilized lynching mobs.
- eitland 6y ago
  > it has a proven solid e2e encryption Correct. It then goes on to - by default at least - upload everyones messages unencrypted to Google Cloud. > the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole. I usually defend Telegram but here I think you are wrong. Telegram also requires a phone number to sign up.
  - mirimir 6y ago
    Session (Signal fork) doesn't require any information. It's end-to-end encrypted by default, and it connects via an onion routing network (LokiNet). And so only LokiNet nodes see the IP address that you connect through. But of course, you connect to them through VPNs or nested VPN chains.
    - aspenmayer 6y ago
      Links for the curious: https://getsession.org https://getsession.org https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609.pdf https://github.com/Loki-project https://github.com/Loki-project Seems to somehow be associated with the working group for Loki cryptocurrency, but not using blockchain to store messages or message contents, per FAQ. https://docs.loki.network/LokiServices/Messenger/Session/ https://docs.loki.network/LokiServices/Messenger/Session/ https://docs.loki.network/Mining/MiningOverview/ https://docs.loki.network/Mining/MiningOverview/ https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak
      - mirimir 6y ago
        As I understand it, Session uses LokiNet, and there are also sites, analogous to Tor onion services, and potentially other services. However, running LokiNet nodes requires a substantial stake, which is payable in Loki. The stake is at risk for malicious behavior, and nodes get paid in Loki for services that they provide to the network. Perhaps some features require user payments, but I haven't researched that.
        aspenmayer 6y ago
        I've looked into a bit more. It uses a crypto based on monero called Loki. Service servers are to be paid out for maintaining the network. It's also possible to mine the crypto. There seem to be software wallet apps available for iOS and Android. LokiNet reminds me of a self-funding P2P decentralized anonymous analog with massively more functionality to Google Jigsaw[1] project called Outline[2], which runs shadowsocks[3] on Digital Ocean droplets or your own Linux infra. [1] Jigsaw, formerly Google Ideas: https://jigsaw.google.com https://jigsaw.google.com [2] Outline: https://getoutline.org https://getoutline.org [3] Shadowsocks: https://shadowsocks.org https://shadowsocks.org
        mirimir 6y ago
        Here's a concise statement about "Why LokiNet?": https://github.com/loki-project/loki-network/blob/master/docs/high-level.txt https://github.com/loki-project/loki-network/blob/master/doc... Some excerpts: > TL;DR edition: an onion router with a tun interface for transporting ip packets anonymously between you and the internet and internally inside itself to other users. > "What if I2P was made in the current year (2018)? What would be different?" > In short we want to permit both anonymous exit and entry network level traffic between LLARP [aka LokiNet] enabled networks and the internet. > In short, I want to take the "best parts" from Tor and I2P and make a new protocol suite.
- luckylion 6y ago
  > You can do whatever you want using Whatsapp (it has a proven solid e2e encryption), the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole. Both Telegram and WhatsApp required a phone number last I checked, but you can install Telegram on a Desktop using a dumb phone for activation, you don't need to run the app. > If it were that easy to influence Whatsapp, India would not have a real problem with Whatsapp-mobilized lynching mobs. India has no jurisdiction over WhatsApp. They can ask Facebook nicely, but that's about it. To stop communication you don't need to read WhatsApp-chats. You just disable the accounts that you want silenced. And you can't do that if you don't have control over the service (hence Western extremists use of Telegram). If you're Russian and you want to talk about how free yourself of Putin, use WhatsApp or Signal, that is: an American provider. If you're American (or living in an American province) and you want to talk about how to free yourself of Washington, you use Telegram (or a Chinese messenger). Even if none of them can ever read your chats, they can a) use the meta data and b) disable your ability to communicate. This also applies if you're a common criminal: US cops will have a much easier time getting meta data on your communication from WhatsApp than from Telegram. It's generally a good idea to know your threat model. Unless you're a Russian Oligarch or Ex-FSB, the FSB is not your problem. But your local domestic intelligence service may be, if you ever step out of line.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mrkstu 6y ago
    The problem being, of course, that you can then potentially be blackmailed by the foreign intelligence agencies...
    - luckylion 6y ago
      That's true, yes, but I believe it only applies if you are a high-ranking official or work in a very sensitive position. Either of those are usually a good indicator that you're okay with "the system", are not a threat to it and your country's intelligence services won't go after you. I don't think the average citizen has to worry about the FSB finding their kinks and blackmailing them. You don't kidnap poor people's children for ransom, you don't blackmail people who have no special powers.
adamsea 6y ago
> It's fine to use WhatsApp to praise Obama, Merkel or anything else that is widely accepted in your society etc, but it's a terrible choice if you're on the shit list of the government. That's actually not always true. Racism is widely accepted in many areas of American society, but, online platforms are beginning to make more of an effort to restrict outright hate (Twitter, for example). LOL also I would like to point out the current President of the United States is the archetypal Obama-hater, so ... I dont know if it makes sense to talk about the government coming down on people who don't praise Obama. I would imagine President Trump also talks a lot of trash about Merkel, so, again, the current chief executive of this one particular government very publicy espouses the beliefs you claim that same government would crack down on. I mean, there's also Fox news. Not praising Obama or Merkel. Very much active. My point is, even if your point may be true, the examples you chose, when compared against some real-world data-points, undermine your own position.
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  Obviously President Trump would prefer Twitter to Telegram, at least if he's still on a bleach & laser kick, given that the original URL says "propagandizing suicidal behavior" is one of their blacklist categories. :-)
whyoh 6y ago
>That's exactly why you want to use something like Telegram if you're in the West: it's not controlled by a Western government. Telegram has headquarters in the UK, a Five Eyes country. It's not unreasonable to assume that its unencrypted comms are monitored by Western gov agencies.
- maqp 6y ago
  Good point. Also, two of its servers reside in the US. And in Malaysia, the server is "fair game" to NSA hackers (as well as any other foreign government). The non-E2EE comms are a joke and a liability of insane proportions.
maqp 6y ago
>it's not controlled by a Western government. That doesn't mean it can't be trivially hacked by a Western government. When you're using service that isn't using E2EE, you're just making two statements: 1. I don't trust Western companies 2. I haven't the foggiest wrt computer security or cryptography

mschuster91 6y ago

You can do whatever you want using Whatsapp (it has a proven solid e2e encryption), the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole. If it were that easy to influence Whatsapp, India would not have a real problem with Whatsapp-mobilized lynching mobs.

eitland 6y ago
> it has a proven solid e2e encryption Correct. It then goes on to - by default at least - upload everyones messages unencrypted to Google Cloud. > the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole. I usually defend Telegram but here I think you are wrong. Telegram also requires a phone number to sign up.
- mirimir 6y ago
  Session (Signal fork) doesn't require any information. It's end-to-end encrypted by default, and it connects via an onion routing network (LokiNet). And so only LokiNet nodes see the IP address that you connect through. But of course, you connect to them through VPNs or nested VPN chains.
  - aspenmayer 6y ago
    Links for the curious: https://getsession.org https://getsession.org https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609.pdf https://github.com/Loki-project https://github.com/Loki-project Seems to somehow be associated with the working group for Loki cryptocurrency, but not using blockchain to store messages or message contents, per FAQ. https://docs.loki.network/LokiServices/Messenger/Session/ https://docs.loki.network/LokiServices/Messenger/Session/ https://docs.loki.network/Mining/MiningOverview/ https://docs.loki.network/Mining/MiningOverview/ https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak
    - mirimir 6y ago
      As I understand it, Session uses LokiNet, and there are also sites, analogous to Tor onion services, and potentially other services. However, running LokiNet nodes requires a substantial stake, which is payable in Loki. The stake is at risk for malicious behavior, and nodes get paid in Loki for services that they provide to the network. Perhaps some features require user payments, but I haven't researched that.
      - aspenmayer 6y ago
        I've looked into a bit more. It uses a crypto based on monero called Loki. Service servers are to be paid out for maintaining the network. It's also possible to mine the crypto. There seem to be software wallet apps available for iOS and Android. LokiNet reminds me of a self-funding P2P decentralized anonymous analog with massively more functionality to Google Jigsaw[1] project called Outline[2], which runs shadowsocks[3] on Digital Ocean droplets or your own Linux infra. [1] Jigsaw, formerly Google Ideas: https://jigsaw.google.com https://jigsaw.google.com [2] Outline: https://getoutline.org https://getoutline.org [3] Shadowsocks: https://shadowsocks.org https://shadowsocks.org
        mirimir 6y ago
        Here's a concise statement about "Why LokiNet?": https://github.com/loki-project/loki-network/blob/master/docs/high-level.txt https://github.com/loki-project/loki-network/blob/master/doc... Some excerpts: > TL;DR edition: an onion router with a tun interface for transporting ip packets anonymously between you and the internet and internally inside itself to other users. > "What if I2P was made in the current year (2018)? What would be different?" > In short we want to permit both anonymous exit and entry network level traffic between LLARP [aka LokiNet] enabled networks and the internet. > In short, I want to take the "best parts" from Tor and I2P and make a new protocol suite.
luckylion 6y ago
> You can do whatever you want using Whatsapp (it has a proven solid e2e encryption), the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole. Both Telegram and WhatsApp required a phone number last I checked, but you can install Telegram on a Desktop using a dumb phone for activation, you don't need to run the app. > If it were that easy to influence Whatsapp, India would not have a real problem with Whatsapp-mobilized lynching mobs. India has no jurisdiction over WhatsApp. They can ask Facebook nicely, but that's about it. To stop communication you don't need to read WhatsApp-chats. You just disable the accounts that you want silenced. And you can't do that if you don't have control over the service (hence Western extremists use of Telegram). If you're Russian and you want to talk about how free yourself of Putin, use WhatsApp or Signal, that is: an American provider. If you're American (or living in an American province) and you want to talk about how to free yourself of Washington, you use Telegram (or a Chinese messenger). Even if none of them can ever read your chats, they can a) use the meta data and b) disable your ability to communicate. This also applies if you're a common criminal: US cops will have a much easier time getting meta data on your communication from WhatsApp than from Telegram. It's generally a good idea to know your threat model. Unless you're a Russian Oligarch or Ex-FSB, the FSB is not your problem. But your local domestic intelligence service may be, if you ever step out of line.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- mrkstu 6y ago
  The problem being, of course, that you can then potentially be blackmailed by the foreign intelligence agencies...
  - luckylion 6y ago
    That's true, yes, but I believe it only applies if you are a high-ranking official or work in a very sensitive position. Either of those are usually a good indicator that you're okay with "the system", are not a threat to it and your country's intelligence services won't go after you. I don't think the average citizen has to worry about the FSB finding their kinks and blackmailing them. You don't kidnap poor people's children for ransom, you don't blackmail people who have no special powers.

adamsea 6y ago

> It's fine to use WhatsApp to praise Obama, Merkel or anything else that is widely accepted in your society etc, but it's a terrible choice if you're on the shit list of the government. That's actually not always true. Racism is widely accepted in many areas of American society, but, online platforms are beginning to make more of an effort to restrict outright hate (Twitter, for example). LOL also I would like to point out the current President of the United States is the archetypal Obama-hater, so ... I dont know if it makes sense to talk about the government coming down on people who don't praise Obama. I would imagine President Trump also talks a lot of trash about Merkel, so, again, the current chief executive of this one particular government very publicy espouses the beliefs you claim that same government would crack down on. I mean, there's also Fox news. Not praising Obama or Merkel. Very much active. My point is, even if your point may be true, the examples you chose, when compared against some real-world data-points, undermine your own position.

082349872349872 6y ago
Obviously President Trump would prefer Twitter to Telegram, at least if he's still on a bleach & laser kick, given that the original URL says "propagandizing suicidal behavior" is one of their blacklist categories. :-)

whyoh 6y ago

>That's exactly why you want to use something like Telegram if you're in the West: it's not controlled by a Western government. Telegram has headquarters in the UK, a Five Eyes country. It's not unreasonable to assume that its unencrypted comms are monitored by Western gov agencies.

maqp 6y ago
Good point. Also, two of its servers reside in the US. And in Malaysia, the server is "fair game" to NSA hackers (as well as any other foreign government). The non-E2EE comms are a joke and a liability of insane proportions.

maqp 6y ago

>it's not controlled by a Western government. That doesn't mean it can't be trivially hacked by a Western government. When you're using service that isn't using E2EE, you're just making two statements: 1. I don't trust Western companies 2. I haven't the foggiest wrt computer security or cryptography