3 ms·

That is quite misleading to a vast amount of people without tech background. I find it dishonest, even more so because Telegram actually does offer e2ee chats -

That is quite misleading to a vast amount of people without tech background. I find it dishonest, even more so because Telegram actually does offer e2ee chats - and 1:1 voice/video chats are already e2ee, for what it's worth.

tapoxi 5y ago
Is it? In WhatsApp all of your messages are E2EE. In Telegram it’s an option, only works in 1:1, doesn’t support desktop, and uses homegrown encryption.
whyoh 5y ago
>That is quite misleading to a vast amount of people without tech background. Not as misleading and potentially harmful as saying "Telegram is encrypted" as a blanket statement, because: 1. as I said, the client-to-server encryption is not noteworthy (almost everything has that) and it shouldn't be enough for privacy-conscious people. 2. even though Telegram does offer some e2e encryption too, its availability is quite limited and not representative of the typical Telegram usage. Sure, I was being too dismissive there. But I don't like how Telegram gets brought up as a "private messenger", in the same context as fully e2e-encrypted messengers like Signal or even Whatsapp. For all intents and purposes, Telegram is more similar to apps like Discord or Slack, seeing how most of the comms can be read by anyone who has access to the server. And Telegram can only be used with a phone number, so in terms of anonymity it's even worse than those.
- lxgr 5y ago
  > For all intents and purposes, Telegram is more similar to apps like Discord or Slack, seeing how most of the comms can be read by anyone who has access to the server. This is absolutely true and a nice comparison at that, thanks! I will try to use that in the future. Most of my non-technical friends using Telegram are convinced that it's more secure than WhatsApp. Even many non-technical news outlets are propagating these claims. It makes me incredibly sad. They are promising a usable Signal, but instead are providing a Discord with mandatory phone number registration. Why resort to such dishonesty? Just let the product speak for itself.

tapoxi 5y ago

Is it? In WhatsApp all of your messages are E2EE. In Telegram it’s an option, only works in 1:1, doesn’t support desktop, and uses homegrown encryption.

whyoh 5y ago

>That is quite misleading to a vast amount of people without tech background. Not as misleading and potentially harmful as saying "Telegram is encrypted" as a blanket statement, because: 1. as I said, the client-to-server encryption is not noteworthy (almost everything has that) and it shouldn't be enough for privacy-conscious people. 2. even though Telegram does offer some e2e encryption too, its availability is quite limited and not representative of the typical Telegram usage. Sure, I was being too dismissive there. But I don't like how Telegram gets brought up as a "private messenger", in the same context as fully e2e-encrypted messengers like Signal or even Whatsapp. For all intents and purposes, Telegram is more similar to apps like Discord or Slack, seeing how most of the comms can be read by anyone who has access to the server. And Telegram can only be used with a phone number, so in terms of anonymity it's even worse than those.

lxgr 5y ago
> For all intents and purposes, Telegram is more similar to apps like Discord or Slack, seeing how most of the comms can be read by anyone who has access to the server. This is absolutely true and a nice comparison at that, thanks! I will try to use that in the future. Most of my non-technical friends using Telegram are convinced that it's more secure than WhatsApp. Even many non-technical news outlets are propagating these claims. It makes me incredibly sad. They are promising a usable Signal, but instead are providing a Discord with mandatory phone number registration. Why resort to such dishonesty? Just let the product speak for itself.