6 ms·

It claims that Telegram has always been encrypted and whatsapp originally wasn't. There is no way to interpret that to make it true. Telegram chats are not e2e

• intricatedetail 6y ago
  How do you know whatsapp is e2e encrypted and there is no mitm going?
  • ikeboy 6y ago
    The same way I know that signal is - trust in the various groups that have incentives to set up encryption correctly and to break it if set up incorrectly.
• shp0ngle 6y ago
  Yeah Durov does that He also claims that Telegram is not server-side open source, because then Iran and China could run their own versions of Telegram and he doesn't want that. As much as I like Telegram because of its GUI and features, Durov often says half-truths like that. (And do not forget all the TON stuff.)
  • ashleshbiradar 6y ago
    what TON stuff?
    • machomaster 6y ago
      Telegram Open Network. I drscribed the idea in another comment above.
  • pindab0ter 6y ago
    Please don’t end a comment with an aside that references non-ubiquitous events using a non-ubiquitous abbreviation. I have absolutely no idea what that’s referring to.
    • machomaster 6y ago
      TON - Telegram Open Network. Blockchain-based technologies that also included the cryptocurrency called Gram, but is way more than just the cryptomoney. I highly recommend reading the "technical paper" if you have time and technical understanding. It's absolutely fascinating (was written by Pavel's genious brother)! Durov decided to develop it and got billions of euros for that. It had some delays, but otherwise looked ready. But then USA came in and said using jaw-dropping argumentation and forbid Telegram from running it ANYWHERE in the world!.. So Durov had to officially abandon the project. Currently TON is still being developed by non-Telegram teams.
  • machomaster 6y ago
    This is a very limited (not honest) interpretation of what he said though. This is what Durov actually said: https://t.me/durovschat/515221 https://t.me/durovschat/515221
• pkulak 6y ago
  I hate how Telegram runs around telling everyone they are "encrypted". They pray on people who don't know the intricate details of encryption. Which is, understandably, most people. This post I'm making right now is exactly as encrypted as a Telegram chat.
  • KMag 6y ago
    > They pray on people We appreciate the prayers (pray), but not the predation (prey). (I have seen the phrase "pray on" used in a religious setting to refer to physically touching someone while praying for them.)
• GranPC 6y ago
  But it's true. Original versions of WhatsApp had no encryption at all, even in transit. https://web.archive.org/web/20110523235136/http://www.yourdailymac.net/2011/05/whatsapp-leaks-usernames-telephone-numbers-and-messages/ https://web.archive.org/web/20110523235136/http://www.yourda...
  • ikeboy 6y ago
    Interesting. Still don't think this is an honest way of describing it: >WhatsApp, on the other hand, had zero encryption for a few years, and then adopted an encryption protocol funded by the US Government
    • machomaster 6y ago
      How is it not honest if it is 100% factually correct?
      • ikeboy 6y ago
        If the beginning of that sentence is referring to 2011, then there's a five year gap until full e2e was implemented that the comment pretends never existed.
        • machomaster 6y ago
          Your interpretation (that you claim make Durov's statement not fully honest) is doing actually the exact opposite. It shows that if anything, Durov didn't write information, that - if written - would have shown Whatsapp in even worse light.
          • ikeboy 6y ago
            Knowing that whatsapp implemented e2e in 2016, the direct implication of his statement is that there was no encryption prior to that.
            • 6y ago