6 ms·

Given how bashing on MTProto is a favourite cryptographers' activity from the day-0, I'm actually kinda encouraged by the fact that's all they found. It's espec

by krick 5y ago

Given how bashing on MTProto is a favourite cryptographers' activity from the day-0, I'm actually kinda encouraged by the fact that's all they found. It's especially nice, that htey could fix all of them without breaking back-compatibility, which isn't really a given for crypto protocols. Would appreciate more technical and less dumbed down responses from the Telegram team, though. I have no idea what the fuck "counting grains in the bags of sound" is supposed to mean. (Also, it's funny, but being accustomed to SMS and such I always somehow assumed Telegram messages can be reordered by chance too, if I send them fast. I never really thought about it, obviously, but simply didn't expect it to be otherwise.)

ufmace 5y ago
That's my takeaway here as well - no serious issues found, and Telegram actively worked with them to fix their minor theoretical issues, and did all of the fixes before the paper was published and without breaking any clients.
maqp 5y ago
>I have no idea what the fuck "counting grains in the bags of sound" is supposed to mean.' They have been doing this since the beginning. Their strategy of downplaying every attack against their protocol serves to mask the fact their team has absolutely no qualifications to implement cryptography. Like the original article stated, Telegram did not even file for CVEs, simply because they look bad. CVEs have been filed for much smaller things than these. Their security game isn't on the side of secure-by-design, but grass-roots-damage-control to justify protocol designed by the owner's brother (who is a geometrician, not a cryptographer) and insecure-by-default. The nepotism and Russian pride should never go before the users' security. But they've never cared about it. Slightly related, you should see /r/telegram on Reddit, that outright censors articles that criticizes the app or discuss its vulnerabilities. From the looks of it, Telegram is more a cult these days than a collective of users. Its users are willing to spend hours arguing over semantics, and Telegram shamelessly makes use of them having no life, by recruiting them to something known as Telegram Support Force https://tsf.telegram.org/ https://tsf.telegram.org/
- dogorman 5y ago
  Russia has been mentioned 7 times in this discussion now, every time by you. I don't have any stake in this fight; I don't use or recommend any of these applications. But you do seem to have a bone to pick.
  - tester756 5y ago
    In Russia it's "legal" to hack other countries or their citizens, so it's not weird take.
    - dogorman 5y ago
      The weird part is being the only guy bringing it up half a dozen times in one conversation.
    - hda2 5y ago
      It's also "legal" to do so in other countries. I think it's better to focus on Telegram's open specification and implementation instead of bashing it because the developers happen to be born somewhere you don't like.
  - maqp 5y ago
    With Russia? No it's just useful to remember Durov's background, and since he's Russian, there aren't many countries he'd be secretly collaborating with. When the vendor is intentionally collecting and defending the collection of such vast amounts of data, you have to ask, who might benefit if Telegram was a front. I'm not specifically against Russia or US, I'm just someone who'd prefer people to have the right to their privacy. Mass surveillance isn't healthy for society, and Telegram is enabling it with their silo of user data. So ultimately, it doesn't matter if Durov is directly playing for any big party, the problem is there's not enough tech in place to prove he isn't and when that's the case, Telegram servers and the user data that sits there, is a free for all. A server in UK is not legally, (or technically) protected from the NSA, CCA, Fancy Bear, Unit 8200, Iranian Cyber Army etc. The only bone to pick here is any vendor who'd claim to be fighting for privacy when their privacy-by-design architecture is indistinguishable from honey pots and surveillance capitalistic companies.
WilTimSon 5y ago
For the grains of sand thing, here's a technical explanation of that: https://core.telegram.org/techfaq/UoL-ETH-4a-proof#4-attacking-the-key-exchange-appendix-f https://core.telegram.org/techfaq/UoL-ETH-4a-proof#4-attacki... This document seems like a better response to the theoretical problems the researchers found.
Siira 5y ago
Telegram messages do sometimes randomly go out of order, especially under bad network conditions.
- kjaftaedi 5y ago
  If they are sent out of order. If a previous message is in a retry state, the second message could go through without issue.
NicolaiS 5y ago
that's all they found Besides the trivial MITM in MTProto 1.0? Telegram protocol defeated. Authors are going to modify crypto-algorithm: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742

by krick 5y ago

ufmace 5y ago

That's my takeaway here as well - no serious issues found, and Telegram actively worked with them to fix their minor theoretical issues, and did all of the fixes before the paper was published and without breaking any clients.

maqp 5y ago

>I have no idea what the fuck "counting grains in the bags of sound" is supposed to mean.' They have been doing this since the beginning. Their strategy of downplaying every attack against their protocol serves to mask the fact their team has absolutely no qualifications to implement cryptography. Like the original article stated, Telegram did not even file for CVEs, simply because they look bad. CVEs have been filed for much smaller things than these. Their security game isn't on the side of secure-by-design, but grass-roots-damage-control to justify protocol designed by the owner's brother (who is a geometrician, not a cryptographer) and insecure-by-default. The nepotism and Russian pride should never go before the users' security. But they've never cared about it. Slightly related, you should see /r/telegram on Reddit, that outright censors articles that criticizes the app or discuss its vulnerabilities. From the looks of it, Telegram is more a cult these days than a collective of users. Its users are willing to spend hours arguing over semantics, and Telegram shamelessly makes use of them having no life, by recruiting them to something known as Telegram Support Force https://tsf.telegram.org/ https://tsf.telegram.org/

dogorman 5y ago
Russia has been mentioned 7 times in this discussion now, every time by you. I don't have any stake in this fight; I don't use or recommend any of these applications. But you do seem to have a bone to pick.
- tester756 5y ago
  In Russia it's "legal" to hack other countries or their citizens, so it's not weird take.
  - dogorman 5y ago
    The weird part is being the only guy bringing it up half a dozen times in one conversation.
  - hda2 5y ago
    It's also "legal" to do so in other countries. I think it's better to focus on Telegram's open specification and implementation instead of bashing it because the developers happen to be born somewhere you don't like.
- maqp 5y ago
  With Russia? No it's just useful to remember Durov's background, and since he's Russian, there aren't many countries he'd be secretly collaborating with. When the vendor is intentionally collecting and defending the collection of such vast amounts of data, you have to ask, who might benefit if Telegram was a front. I'm not specifically against Russia or US, I'm just someone who'd prefer people to have the right to their privacy. Mass surveillance isn't healthy for society, and Telegram is enabling it with their silo of user data. So ultimately, it doesn't matter if Durov is directly playing for any big party, the problem is there's not enough tech in place to prove he isn't and when that's the case, Telegram servers and the user data that sits there, is a free for all. A server in UK is not legally, (or technically) protected from the NSA, CCA, Fancy Bear, Unit 8200, Iranian Cyber Army etc. The only bone to pick here is any vendor who'd claim to be fighting for privacy when their privacy-by-design architecture is indistinguishable from honey pots and surveillance capitalistic companies.

WilTimSon 5y ago

For the grains of sand thing, here's a technical explanation of that: https://core.telegram.org/techfaq/UoL-ETH-4a-proof#4-attacking-the-key-exchange-appendix-f https://core.telegram.org/techfaq/UoL-ETH-4a-proof#4-attacki... This document seems like a better response to the theoretical problems the researchers found.

Siira 5y ago

Telegram messages do sometimes randomly go out of order, especially under bad network conditions.

kjaftaedi 5y ago
If they are sent out of order. If a previous message is in a retry state, the second message could go through without issue.

NicolaiS 5y ago

that's all they found Besides the trivial MITM in MTProto 1.0? Telegram protocol defeated. Authors are going to modify crypto-algorithm: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742