4 ms·
Show me a Signal channel with 2 million people in it. Even if it's only writeable by the channel owner. The adversary in their case is mostly limited to beatin
by literallycancer 6y ago
Show me a Signal channel with 2 million people in it. Even if it's only writeable by the channel owner.
The adversary in their case is mostly limited to beating up random people and picking on those that take a public stand against the regime.
Turns out it's more important that it works at all and not whether the security is perfect.
- shawnz 6y agoShow me an E2E encrypted Telegram channel with 2 million people in it, or it's not a fair comparison. There are lots of unencrypted social media apps which can support groups of 2 million, just like Telegram.
- maqp 6y agoChannels != group chats != supergroups. Supergroups and channels don't have expectation of privacy. They're not about protecting the content but about spreading sousveillance material, message etc. There only your anonymity matters so you can be safe with burner SIM + burner phone + Tor. But immediately when you step into realm of confidentiality E2EE matters and Telegram becomes a piece of shit software. No E2EE for groups, desktop clients, or for anything by default. Small dissident groups greatly benefit from E2EE when Belarusian government can't read their conversation by just hacking a single server. Both are important. Signal isn't about non-private mass-messaging like channels and supergroups so it's not going to offer those. Telegram could be fantastic for channels and supergroups if it used Tor by default and didn't ask for phone number. But it doesn't, and it tries to do too many things while ignoring too many security problems. Turns out that's a recipe to a disaster. See e.g. how CCA tracked Telegram users in Hong Kong, and how Telegram failed to enable the protective measures for users by default.