14 ms·

Why Isn’t Telegram End-to-End Encrypted by Default (2017)

127 points by aabbcc1241 6y ago

out_of_protocol 6y ago
Still avoiding the main point - e2e encryption does not prohibit syncing, backup etc for said data (without decryption)
- pampa 6y ago
  e2e does not prohibit it. But makes it hard or impossible even for an advanced user (i tried moving my whatsapp data from iphone to android once, not sure of the current status with signal). Telegram is all about convenience, security is just bolt on. Everybody says they care about security, but hardly any TG user does it, because it is inconvenient. Install it on any any new device, confirm your phone number with an sms and whoops, all your chats and drunk and stoned pics are back.
  - Jtsummers 6y ago
    If messaging clients like WhatsApp permitted a Keybase styled authentication of additional devices, then migration (so long as the original were available) wouldn't be difficult at all. And if they permitted backup to a user selected service (for instance, Google's for Android versus Apple's for iOS) then migration across OSes would become simplified for users. But the WhatsApp iOS client backs up to iCloud, and the Android client backs up to Google, and this creates a blocking issue unless the user is willing to jump through hoops and use 3rd party tools.
    - snvzz 6y ago
      Matrix actually does authenticate additional devices, and handle all that. It's already out there, just a matter of adopting it.
  - kitkat_new 6y ago
    This just is not true. The fact that you are writing this, clearly shows you don't know of Element/Matrix. When you use Matrix, and open a web client, the only thing you have to do is 1) logging in and 2) providing a password, key file, scan a QR code, OR compare Emojis - and you get everything synced. The same holds for any type of client. I barely see a loss of convenience, let a lone something being hard or impossible.
    - pampa 6y ago
      You are right, I never used Matrix. I guess i have to check it out. Missed it. Usable client apps for martix are what, 1.5 years old? Signal seems to have been around for ages. OTP even longer
      - kitkat_new 6y ago
        > Usable client apps for martix are what, 1.5 years old? Older, Element (also known as Riot and Vector) should already have been existing for at least 5 years.
meibo 6y ago
> 1) Users don’t want to lose their entire message history when they lose/change their phones so apps of this kind never become massively popular. I think this is a key point to consider for Signal and the other "good" messengers - there's ways to do secure backups, it just needs to be implemented so well that you won't miss the convenience of Google Drive backups. I tend to fall back on anecdotes a lot, but the first thing my relatives ask me when setting up a new phone is "will I have my texts" - people want to be able to look through the past 10 years of conversation and especially media with someone and WhatsApp makes this as easy as one click during setup.
- pampa 6y ago
  > and WhatsApp makes this as easy as one click during setup. unless you switch platforms. then you lose it all
  - tandav 6y ago
    Yes, this happened to me after iOS -> Android switch all messages was wiped, you cant load icloud backup on android
    - tw04 6y ago
      >you cant load icloud backup on android for free If you're willing to pay for an app, you can definitely do that. https://www.syncios.com/icloud/how-to-recover-data-from-itunes-icloud-backup-to-android-phone.html https://www.syncios.com/icloud/how-to-recover-data-from-itun... *I'm not advocating for this specific app, I've never used it and couldn't comment on how well it works, just an example*
      - codetrotter 6y ago
        The only mention of WhatsApp on that page is a link to https://www.syncios.com/whatsapp-transfer/ https://www.syncios.com/whatsapp-transfer/ Not sure if the WhatsApp transfer is a feature of their main product or if it’s sold separately. Either way I’d use the buy button on the page that is about WhatsApp to be sure, if I was looking to transfer WhatsApp data between iOS and Android.
mcint 6y ago
Bait-and-switch topic in the opening paragraph. Insists that what people ask for, e2e chat, isn’t what they actually want or should want.
- pampa 6y ago
  And he is right. If you want e2e use signal, threema, or OTR/OMEMO. The majority of telegram users want convenient messaging, group chats, news channels and voice group calls. Think slack with a fast native app.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - solstice 6y ago
    The only thing missing from signal among the things you listed is news, no?
  - rhn_mk1 6y ago
    Does wanting any of this automatically mean wanting e2e is wrong or invalid?
    - alwaysdoit 6y ago
      No, but it's automatically the right tradeoff for everyone. Security measures are always a tradeoff between convenience and security. Not everyone's tradeoffs work out evenly. Sometimes backups are a more important risk to mitigate than government surveillance.
      - rhn_mk1 6y ago
        > it's automatically the right tradeoff for everyone That can be only true if there is no tradeoff. A tradeoff by definition is a situation where the optimum depends on individual preferences.
  - scubbo 6y ago
snvzz 6y ago
The why doesn't matter. (the tl;dr is that they apparently never bothered to support some popular features within the context of e2ee, and believe people ultimately don't care about e2ee by default) What matters is that: - It doesn't do e2ee by default. - It is not a properly documented protocol[0]. - It is not an open protocol. - It has a history of extremely poor cryptography practices[1][2]. - It is not open source. Thus, we should steer people away from it, and into acceptable solutions that meet these fundamental requirements. Matrix, Signal and Tox come to mind; I have experience with all of these, and I can only recommend Matrix. [0]: https://core.telegram.org/mtproto https://core.telegram.org/mtproto [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25726068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25726068 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25641399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25641399
- pmlnr 6y ago
  I've been exploring options with a friend, their requirements: 1) option for large groups (around 250) This drops Signal out which has a limit of 150 on groups: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007319331-Group-chats https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007319331-Gr... 2) e2e encrypted (because it sounds good, not because people actually understand what it is), including groups. This drops Telegram out: no e2e rooms. 3) handles sending photos, videos, and voice messages. More or less kills XMPP, unless people are on the latest-and-greatest version of Conversations and maybe ChatSecure. 4) the maintaining organisation needs to be reasonably big with decent privacy. 5) usable for completely non technical generic population - meaning Tox is out as well. As much as I dislike to admit it, this leaves Matrix, and nothing else. My problem with Matrix is that it's so resource hungry - both the servers and the clients - is that it's silly. Yes, I know "optimization is coming" but even Dendrite eats 1.5GB memory easily with a single user joining a few, medium sized, federated rooms (yes, I've tried). Footnote: Threema... no. There is no need for yet another competing open source thing, there are enough with Signal, Matrix, and XMPP.
  - hiq 6y ago
    > This drops Signal out which has a limit of 150 on groups Your own link mentions "Size limit of 1000", where did you see 150? To be fair that's for new groups, maybe the limit used to be lower. Or do you mean that in practice it's not usable beyond 150 people?
pmlnr 6y ago
E2E chat is an interesting topic. Say I'm using XMPP, my own server, talking to a federated one, all over TLS, including S2S. E2E on top of that, in my personal opinion, is a massive overkill for most cases and people. Related read: https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternative.html#cryptography-matters-but-then-it-also-doesnt https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternat... It is, however, different, when it comes to a server that I don't control in any form. In that scenario, it is rather useful, but I'm still a lot more worried about the unencrypted meta surrounding it. See email and PGP in this topic, which has always been a pain point for many. Thoughts?
- pampa 6y ago
  > Thoughts? Pick your adversaries and scale your opsec accordingly. Unless you are a person of interest in national security matters, just the fact that you communicated with somebody does not incriminate you.
- kitkat_new 6y ago
  Honestly you have no idea about real use cases. Almost no one is going to set up a dedicated local server for all of his conversations, hosting only conversations in which you are part of anyways. Most people aren't even able to do this.
  - pmlnr 6y ago
    > Almost no one is going to set up a dedicated local server for all of his conversations 85000 Prosody servers disagree to some level :) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25713679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25713679
    - kitkat_new 6y ago
      in other words, almost no one compared to at least 2 billion potential users.
      - pmlnr 6y ago
annoyingnoob 6y ago
Maybe I'm missing something, seems like any of these apps that might want local storage for some reason could store data in an encrypted format. A cloud backup would then be backing up and restoring encrypted data. Where the user holds the key in some form to unlock the data at the right time. They bring up a good point that anyone with access to the message can leak it, no matter how tight you lock down your side. Something ephemeral seems best if you really want security.
srhngpr 6y ago
Genuine question, and I'm certainly no expert in this - just a curious end-user, aren't the backups that WhatsApp creates and uploads to iCloud/GDrive kind of encrypted? As in, I can't simply download the backup file and access the messages and media? My understanding is that in order to restore/access said messages and media, you would need the SIM/phone number that created the backup file and would have to register again with WhatsApp to receive a decryption key from WhatsApp servers. So doesn't this mean in effect that even though it's not super secure, the backup file stored on iCloud/GDrive is also protected from Apple and Google's prying eyes? EDIT: For anyone interested, the backups are indeed encrypted. See: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136072/how-can-whatsapp-restore-local-or-google-drive-backups?rq=1 https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136072/how-can-...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Ashoat 6y ago
  My understanding is that WhatsApp backups are plaintext. It's true that Apple/Google can't recover your WhatsApp account with just the plaintext, but I believe they can read the messages.
  - srhngpr 6y ago
    Thanks for replying! This is concerning if true. Is this documented or proven anywhere? I had heard something similar, but can't seem to find any reliable source that confirms the messages are in plaintext.
    - ffpip 6y ago
      https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-backups-plaintext,37718.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-back... WhatsApp recently announced that users will soon be able to backup all of their data to Google Drive without that storage eating into their allocated Drive storage. What the company ommitted to say at the time was that the data backed-up to Drive will be stored in plaintext, without any encryption.
rodolphoarruda 6y ago
I don't get this: "These backups are not e2e-encrypted and get decrypted whenever(...)" Are they or are they not encrypted?
- this_user 6y ago
  They are probably encrypted in the backend DB with a symmetric cipher on the server with a key that Telegram have access to.
- noctua 6y ago
  The chats are encrypted and stored encrypted on the cloud, but they have access to the key. If they didn't have access to the key they couldn't allow some of the functionality that people want like being able to see the chats from different devices. Telegram has secret chats too which are e2e encrypted and don't store anything on the cloud.
tarasmatsyk 6y ago
Here is what puzzles me every time about telegram (which is my primary messager so far) I can get the reasons behind not doing e2e encryption by default to reach more audience (msgs history, lack of resources on start, special backups) What I cannot get is why Durov is blaming FB/WhatsApp that much, it seems to be the main competitor. As for me the story with WhatsApp is clear, it's Facebook and if you like being Zucked - go with it. But why so much hate on it? On the other hand, every time Signal pops up the only answer I see: 'because it does only e2e well which is only one feature of Telegram' - wrong, Signal does secure messaging and messager has to do its job well, that's it. You need a media platform - go for Telegram/WhatsApp/Facebook, you need a messager - use Signal/Wire/etc Does anyone else feels this bias towards WhatsApp? I cannot blame WhatsApp for being WhatsApp, that's how FB makes money
- ip26 6y ago
  There was & may still be a lot of anger towards WhatsApp. It was only after it became the de facto messaging app for most of the world that it became a FB property, so I think people felt either betrayed, hoodwinked, or simply trapped without a good exit. Compare to FB Messenger, which was always a FB product from day one, so you always knew what you were getting.
  - tarasmatsyk 6y ago
    What you say makes sense, In any case, I am glad WhatsApp founder put some money into Signal, he's done an amazing job and deserves all the money. I am from another side of messagers, as Viber concured Easter Europe - Telegram seemed like an obvious choice after VK got stolen from Durov. Signal was not that popular, that's why I did not start migration earlier
kitkat_new 6y ago
Seems they have yet to meet the Matrix Protocol.
- t-writescode 6y ago
  Matrix is a protocol. Servers are horrible to set up and you have to find federations to join. Telegram, Signal and others are centralized, so you join one, you're a member of all.
  - kitkat_new 6y ago
    Actually setting up a server is not difficult. Check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDddKmdLEdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDddKmdLEdg for setting one up with video conferencing. Finding a server is not difficult - in the worst case you take the default server. And given the server is not locked down, you have access to all other servers (and their users) as well. So I don't really get where you are going with this.
    - t-writescode 6y ago
      > Actually setting up a server is not difficult. And yet you point me to a YouTube video, rather than a link on their website. The documentation itself strongly encourages setting up your own server to have your own user information and then federating into a system, and yet, the documentation doesn't seem to describe, in friendly terms, how to do that. It might be easy to set up, but I've had trouble discovering all of that in their documentation.
      - kitkat_new 6y ago
        > And yet you point me to a YouTube video, rather than a link on their website. So you can see it > and yet, the documentation doesn't seem to describe, in friendly terms, how to do that. mind to expand that?
        t-writescode 6y ago
Ashoat 6y ago
This article touches on the core issue holding back E2E encryption today. There's currently no way for a sophisticated application to implement E2E encryption without accepting tradeoffs in terms of the product. I'm working on starting a new company called Comm and we're trying to scale E2E. Some more context here: https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm (We're currently hiring!!)
- kitkat_new 6y ago
  > There's currently no way for a sophisticated application to implement E2E encryption without accepting tradeoffs in terms of the product. no? > I'm working on starting a new company called Comm and we're trying to scale E2E. Some more context here: https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm How about you join forces with MLS
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Tepix 6y ago
Even with e2e encrypted chats, the servers could store the encrypted conversations if the devices do not have enough storage to have all them stored locally. Device Backups: it's an important point that users need to be educated about. But it's also a distraction just like talking about the privacy of keyboard apps or unwanted link previews while composing/reading messages.
oconnor663 6y ago
Note that Keybase is end-to-end encrypted and also supports persistent message history across multiple devices. This doesn't have to be an either-or thing.
jswizzy 6y ago
Isn't Telegram in Russia and most likel a KGB honeypot
- olah_1 6y ago
  No, Durav made a post about this recently but it was on his Telegram channel. Basically they don't have servers in Russia and it has been banned there in the past.
  - ta1610429351 6y ago
    Durov's servers may be anywhere but his arse is in Russia. That's more than enough leverage for KGB to silent him and/or Telegram at will. Yet, for some inexplicable reason, he still lives in Russia all this time. Food for thought.
    - olah_1 6y ago
      Russia has already "silenced" Telegram in the past. I think he lives in Russia because he is Russian and enjoys it there. Your attitude towards Russia is humorous, given that you're far more likely to be silenced in America these days. Except it's worse in America because you won't just be silenced. You will be completely cut off from life financially, communications-wise, commercially. Ironically, the only people pressuring Durav to do things like ban Telegram channels is Apple and Google.
olah_1 6y ago
Look at Ethereum smart contract wallets today[1]. They have social account recovery in case you shoot yourself in the foot. If it can be used for your money, it can be used for your chat history. [1]: https://www.argent.xyz/blog/a-new-era-for-crypto-security/ https://www.argent.xyz/blog/a-new-era-for-crypto-security/
noxer 6y ago
People complain here on HN that public or semi-public telegram groups are not e2e encrypted. Yes, your HN comment isn't either. And there is no point in encrypting it if its mean to be read by others. Telegram isn't just a messenger. Its a social media like platform with millions of groups and channels you can find trough telegram or they are linked form other places. Would there be a use case for a fully private e2e group chat? sure, I have a family chat which probably counts as fully private. But even if it could be e2e it would not be because my family wants to have backups and seamless switch between devices. They are also unable to reliable protect they devices form third party accesses trough malware/spyware etc. All my other groups are public or semi public (means link can only be found if you are part of the right internet community) The messages there are no other than the comments here.
- mvolfik 6y ago
  this. the endless complaints about telegram not being E2EE by default always blow my mind. can we have a discussion about other more serious issues with Telegram, if there are any?
annoyingnoob 6y ago
Here is an interesting version of 'any one with access to information can leak it, even if you secure your side'. https://threatpost.com/social-profiles-leaked-chinese-data-scrapers/162936/ https://threatpost.com/social-profiles-leaked-chinese-data-s...
thrwway34 6y ago
Because Russians want easy access to conversations.
- ffpip 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia
  - thrwway34 6y ago
    Just a PR stunt - during this 'blocking' Russia Today, their Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other government entities managed to create accounts in Telegram.
    - ffpip 6y ago
      Because circumventing blocks is easy with Telegram. They weren't able to block the app. I've used the app. Proxies are a click away. Even an average user can run them with a single click.
ta1610429351 6y ago
It's beyond me how anyone can trust a Russian messenger. It's impossible to do anything in Russia without KGB involvement, let alone to run a secure messenger. Had the KGB not had access to Telegram data, Durov would have be long gone like Nemtsov, Politkovskaya, and others.

127 points by aabbcc1241 6y ago

out_of_protocol 6y ago

Still avoiding the main point - e2e encryption does not prohibit syncing, backup etc for said data (without decryption)

pampa 6y ago
e2e does not prohibit it. But makes it hard or impossible even for an advanced user (i tried moving my whatsapp data from iphone to android once, not sure of the current status with signal). Telegram is all about convenience, security is just bolt on. Everybody says they care about security, but hardly any TG user does it, because it is inconvenient. Install it on any any new device, confirm your phone number with an sms and whoops, all your chats and drunk and stoned pics are back.
- Jtsummers 6y ago
  If messaging clients like WhatsApp permitted a Keybase styled authentication of additional devices, then migration (so long as the original were available) wouldn't be difficult at all. And if they permitted backup to a user selected service (for instance, Google's for Android versus Apple's for iOS) then migration across OSes would become simplified for users. But the WhatsApp iOS client backs up to iCloud, and the Android client backs up to Google, and this creates a blocking issue unless the user is willing to jump through hoops and use 3rd party tools.
  - snvzz 6y ago
    Matrix actually does authenticate additional devices, and handle all that. It's already out there, just a matter of adopting it.
- kitkat_new 6y ago
  This just is not true. The fact that you are writing this, clearly shows you don't know of Element/Matrix. When you use Matrix, and open a web client, the only thing you have to do is 1) logging in and 2) providing a password, key file, scan a QR code, OR compare Emojis - and you get everything synced. The same holds for any type of client. I barely see a loss of convenience, let a lone something being hard or impossible.
  - pampa 6y ago
    You are right, I never used Matrix. I guess i have to check it out. Missed it. Usable client apps for martix are what, 1.5 years old? Signal seems to have been around for ages. OTP even longer
    - kitkat_new 6y ago
      > Usable client apps for martix are what, 1.5 years old? Older, Element (also known as Riot and Vector) should already have been existing for at least 5 years.

meibo 6y ago

> 1) Users don’t want to lose their entire message history when they lose/change their phones so apps of this kind never become massively popular. I think this is a key point to consider for Signal and the other "good" messengers - there's ways to do secure backups, it just needs to be implemented so well that you won't miss the convenience of Google Drive backups. I tend to fall back on anecdotes a lot, but the first thing my relatives ask me when setting up a new phone is "will I have my texts" - people want to be able to look through the past 10 years of conversation and especially media with someone and WhatsApp makes this as easy as one click during setup.

pampa 6y ago
> and WhatsApp makes this as easy as one click during setup. unless you switch platforms. then you lose it all
- tandav 6y ago
  Yes, this happened to me after iOS -> Android switch all messages was wiped, you cant load icloud backup on android
  - tw04 6y ago
    >you cant load icloud backup on android for free If you're willing to pay for an app, you can definitely do that. https://www.syncios.com/icloud/how-to-recover-data-from-itunes-icloud-backup-to-android-phone.html https://www.syncios.com/icloud/how-to-recover-data-from-itun... *I'm not advocating for this specific app, I've never used it and couldn't comment on how well it works, just an example*
    - codetrotter 6y ago
      The only mention of WhatsApp on that page is a link to https://www.syncios.com/whatsapp-transfer/ https://www.syncios.com/whatsapp-transfer/ Not sure if the WhatsApp transfer is a feature of their main product or if it’s sold separately. Either way I’d use the buy button on the page that is about WhatsApp to be sure, if I was looking to transfer WhatsApp data between iOS and Android.

mcint 6y ago

Bait-and-switch topic in the opening paragraph. Insists that what people ask for, e2e chat, isn’t what they actually want or should want.

pampa 6y ago
And he is right. If you want e2e use signal, threema, or OTR/OMEMO. The majority of telegram users want convenient messaging, group chats, news channels and voice group calls. Think slack with a fast native app.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- solstice 6y ago
  The only thing missing from signal among the things you listed is news, no?
- rhn_mk1 6y ago
  Does wanting any of this automatically mean wanting e2e is wrong or invalid?
  - alwaysdoit 6y ago
    No, but it's automatically the right tradeoff for everyone. Security measures are always a tradeoff between convenience and security. Not everyone's tradeoffs work out evenly. Sometimes backups are a more important risk to mitigate than government surveillance.
    - rhn_mk1 6y ago
      > it's automatically the right tradeoff for everyone That can be only true if there is no tradeoff. A tradeoff by definition is a situation where the optimum depends on individual preferences.
- scubbo 6y ago

snvzz 6y ago

The why doesn't matter. (the tl;dr is that they apparently never bothered to support some popular features within the context of e2ee, and believe people ultimately don't care about e2ee by default) What matters is that: - It doesn't do e2ee by default. - It is not a properly documented protocol[0]. - It is not an open protocol. - It has a history of extremely poor cryptography practices[1][2]. - It is not open source. Thus, we should steer people away from it, and into acceptable solutions that meet these fundamental requirements. Matrix, Signal and Tox come to mind; I have experience with all of these, and I can only recommend Matrix. [0]: https://core.telegram.org/mtproto https://core.telegram.org/mtproto [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25726068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25726068 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25641399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25641399

pmlnr 6y ago
I've been exploring options with a friend, their requirements: 1) option for large groups (around 250) This drops Signal out which has a limit of 150 on groups: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007319331-Group-chats https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007319331-Gr... 2) e2e encrypted (because it sounds good, not because people actually understand what it is), including groups. This drops Telegram out: no e2e rooms. 3) handles sending photos, videos, and voice messages. More or less kills XMPP, unless people are on the latest-and-greatest version of Conversations and maybe ChatSecure. 4) the maintaining organisation needs to be reasonably big with decent privacy. 5) usable for completely non technical generic population - meaning Tox is out as well. As much as I dislike to admit it, this leaves Matrix, and nothing else. My problem with Matrix is that it's so resource hungry - both the servers and the clients - is that it's silly. Yes, I know "optimization is coming" but even Dendrite eats 1.5GB memory easily with a single user joining a few, medium sized, federated rooms (yes, I've tried). Footnote: Threema... no. There is no need for yet another competing open source thing, there are enough with Signal, Matrix, and XMPP.
- hiq 6y ago
  > This drops Signal out which has a limit of 150 on groups Your own link mentions "Size limit of 1000", where did you see 150? To be fair that's for new groups, maybe the limit used to be lower. Or do you mean that in practice it's not usable beyond 150 people?

pmlnr 6y ago

E2E chat is an interesting topic. Say I'm using XMPP, my own server, talking to a federated one, all over TLS, including S2S. E2E on top of that, in my personal opinion, is a massive overkill for most cases and people. Related read: https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternative.html#cryptography-matters-but-then-it-also-doesnt https://homebrewserver.club/have-you-considered-the-alternat... It is, however, different, when it comes to a server that I don't control in any form. In that scenario, it is rather useful, but I'm still a lot more worried about the unencrypted meta surrounding it. See email and PGP in this topic, which has always been a pain point for many. Thoughts?

pampa 6y ago
> Thoughts? Pick your adversaries and scale your opsec accordingly. Unless you are a person of interest in national security matters, just the fact that you communicated with somebody does not incriminate you.
kitkat_new 6y ago
Honestly you have no idea about real use cases. Almost no one is going to set up a dedicated local server for all of his conversations, hosting only conversations in which you are part of anyways. Most people aren't even able to do this.
- pmlnr 6y ago
  > Almost no one is going to set up a dedicated local server for all of his conversations 85000 Prosody servers disagree to some level :) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25713679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25713679
  - kitkat_new 6y ago
    in other words, almost no one compared to at least 2 billion potential users.
    - pmlnr 6y ago

annoyingnoob 6y ago

Maybe I'm missing something, seems like any of these apps that might want local storage for some reason could store data in an encrypted format. A cloud backup would then be backing up and restoring encrypted data. Where the user holds the key in some form to unlock the data at the right time. They bring up a good point that anyone with access to the message can leak it, no matter how tight you lock down your side. Something ephemeral seems best if you really want security.

srhngpr 6y ago

Genuine question, and I'm certainly no expert in this - just a curious end-user, aren't the backups that WhatsApp creates and uploads to iCloud/GDrive kind of encrypted? As in, I can't simply download the backup file and access the messages and media? My understanding is that in order to restore/access said messages and media, you would need the SIM/phone number that created the backup file and would have to register again with WhatsApp to receive a decryption key from WhatsApp servers. So doesn't this mean in effect that even though it's not super secure, the backup file stored on iCloud/GDrive is also protected from Apple and Google's prying eyes? EDIT: For anyone interested, the backups are indeed encrypted. See: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136072/how-can-whatsapp-restore-local-or-google-drive-backups?rq=1 https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136072/how-can-...

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Ashoat 6y ago
My understanding is that WhatsApp backups are plaintext. It's true that Apple/Google can't recover your WhatsApp account with just the plaintext, but I believe they can read the messages.
- srhngpr 6y ago
  Thanks for replying! This is concerning if true. Is this documented or proven anywhere? I had heard something similar, but can't seem to find any reliable source that confirms the messages are in plaintext.
  - ffpip 6y ago
    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-backups-plaintext,37718.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-back... WhatsApp recently announced that users will soon be able to backup all of their data to Google Drive without that storage eating into their allocated Drive storage. What the company ommitted to say at the time was that the data backed-up to Drive will be stored in plaintext, without any encryption.

rodolphoarruda 6y ago

I don't get this: "These backups are not e2e-encrypted and get decrypted whenever(...)" Are they or are they not encrypted?

this_user 6y ago
They are probably encrypted in the backend DB with a symmetric cipher on the server with a key that Telegram have access to.
noctua 6y ago
The chats are encrypted and stored encrypted on the cloud, but they have access to the key. If they didn't have access to the key they couldn't allow some of the functionality that people want like being able to see the chats from different devices. Telegram has secret chats too which are e2e encrypted and don't store anything on the cloud.

tarasmatsyk 6y ago

Here is what puzzles me every time about telegram (which is my primary messager so far) I can get the reasons behind not doing e2e encryption by default to reach more audience (msgs history, lack of resources on start, special backups) What I cannot get is why Durov is blaming FB/WhatsApp that much, it seems to be the main competitor. As for me the story with WhatsApp is clear, it's Facebook and if you like being Zucked - go with it. But why so much hate on it? On the other hand, every time Signal pops up the only answer I see: 'because it does only e2e well which is only one feature of Telegram' - wrong, Signal does secure messaging and messager has to do its job well, that's it. You need a media platform - go for Telegram/WhatsApp/Facebook, you need a messager - use Signal/Wire/etc Does anyone else feels this bias towards WhatsApp? I cannot blame WhatsApp for being WhatsApp, that's how FB makes money

ip26 6y ago
There was & may still be a lot of anger towards WhatsApp. It was only after it became the de facto messaging app for most of the world that it became a FB property, so I think people felt either betrayed, hoodwinked, or simply trapped without a good exit. Compare to FB Messenger, which was always a FB product from day one, so you always knew what you were getting.
- tarasmatsyk 6y ago
  What you say makes sense, In any case, I am glad WhatsApp founder put some money into Signal, he's done an amazing job and deserves all the money. I am from another side of messagers, as Viber concured Easter Europe - Telegram seemed like an obvious choice after VK got stolen from Durov. Signal was not that popular, that's why I did not start migration earlier

kitkat_new 6y ago

Seems they have yet to meet the Matrix Protocol.

t-writescode 6y ago
Matrix is a protocol. Servers are horrible to set up and you have to find federations to join. Telegram, Signal and others are centralized, so you join one, you're a member of all.
- kitkat_new 6y ago
  Actually setting up a server is not difficult. Check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDddKmdLEdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDddKmdLEdg for setting one up with video conferencing. Finding a server is not difficult - in the worst case you take the default server. And given the server is not locked down, you have access to all other servers (and their users) as well. So I don't really get where you are going with this.
  - t-writescode 6y ago
    > Actually setting up a server is not difficult. And yet you point me to a YouTube video, rather than a link on their website. The documentation itself strongly encourages setting up your own server to have your own user information and then federating into a system, and yet, the documentation doesn't seem to describe, in friendly terms, how to do that. It might be easy to set up, but I've had trouble discovering all of that in their documentation.
    - kitkat_new 6y ago
      > And yet you point me to a YouTube video, rather than a link on their website. So you can see it > and yet, the documentation doesn't seem to describe, in friendly terms, how to do that. mind to expand that?
      - t-writescode 6y ago

Ashoat 6y ago

This article touches on the core issue holding back E2E encryption today. There's currently no way for a sophisticated application to implement E2E encryption without accepting tradeoffs in terms of the product. I'm working on starting a new company called Comm and we're trying to scale E2E. Some more context here: https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm (We're currently hiring!!)

kitkat_new 6y ago
> There's currently no way for a sophisticated application to implement E2E encryption without accepting tradeoffs in terms of the product. no? > I'm working on starting a new company called Comm and we're trying to scale E2E. Some more context here: https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm https://site.ashoat.com/comm/comm How about you join forces with MLS

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Tepix 6y ago

Even with e2e encrypted chats, the servers could store the encrypted conversations if the devices do not have enough storage to have all them stored locally. Device Backups: it's an important point that users need to be educated about. But it's also a distraction just like talking about the privacy of keyboard apps or unwanted link previews while composing/reading messages.

oconnor663 6y ago

Note that Keybase is end-to-end encrypted and also supports persistent message history across multiple devices. This doesn't have to be an either-or thing.

jswizzy 6y ago

Isn't Telegram in Russia and most likel a KGB honeypot

olah_1 6y ago
No, Durav made a post about this recently but it was on his Telegram channel. Basically they don't have servers in Russia and it has been banned there in the past.
- ta1610429351 6y ago
  Durov's servers may be anywhere but his arse is in Russia. That's more than enough leverage for KGB to silent him and/or Telegram at will. Yet, for some inexplicable reason, he still lives in Russia all this time. Food for thought.
  - olah_1 6y ago
    Russia has already "silenced" Telegram in the past. I think he lives in Russia because he is Russian and enjoys it there. Your attitude towards Russia is humorous, given that you're far more likely to be silenced in America these days. Except it's worse in America because you won't just be silenced. You will be completely cut off from life financially, communications-wise, commercially. Ironically, the only people pressuring Durav to do things like ban Telegram channels is Apple and Google.

olah_1 6y ago

Look at Ethereum smart contract wallets today[1]. They have social account recovery in case you shoot yourself in the foot. If it can be used for your money, it can be used for your chat history. [1]: https://www.argent.xyz/blog/a-new-era-for-crypto-security/ https://www.argent.xyz/blog/a-new-era-for-crypto-security/

noxer 6y ago

People complain here on HN that public or semi-public telegram groups are not e2e encrypted. Yes, your HN comment isn't either. And there is no point in encrypting it if its mean to be read by others. Telegram isn't just a messenger. Its a social media like platform with millions of groups and channels you can find trough telegram or they are linked form other places. Would there be a use case for a fully private e2e group chat? sure, I have a family chat which probably counts as fully private. But even if it could be e2e it would not be because my family wants to have backups and seamless switch between devices. They are also unable to reliable protect they devices form third party accesses trough malware/spyware etc. All my other groups are public or semi public (means link can only be found if you are part of the right internet community) The messages there are no other than the comments here.

mvolfik 6y ago
this. the endless complaints about telegram not being E2EE by default always blow my mind. can we have a discussion about other more serious issues with Telegram, if there are any?

annoyingnoob 6y ago

Here is an interesting version of 'any one with access to information can leak it, even if you secure your side'. https://threatpost.com/social-profiles-leaked-chinese-data-scrapers/162936/ https://threatpost.com/social-profiles-leaked-chinese-data-s...

thrwway34 6y ago

Because Russians want easy access to conversations.

ffpip 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia
- thrwway34 6y ago
  Just a PR stunt - during this 'blocking' Russia Today, their Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other government entities managed to create accounts in Telegram.
  - ffpip 6y ago
    Because circumventing blocks is easy with Telegram. They weren't able to block the app. I've used the app. Proxies are a click away. Even an average user can run them with a single click.

ta1610429351 6y ago

It's beyond me how anyone can trust a Russian messenger. It's impossible to do anything in Russia without KGB involvement, let alone to run a secure messenger. Had the KGB not had access to Telegram data, Durov would have be long gone like Nemtsov, Politkovskaya, and others.