10 ms·

Would love to see this platform opened up. I've been recommended by users, but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. App install + mobile

Would love to see this platform opened up. I've been recommended by users, but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. App install + mobile number as a login/username is a deal breaker for me. Horrible experience trying to explain why this isn't a sane security model to users.

konart 4y ago
>mobile number as a login/username Well, you can buy a number (+888) on fragment and use one instead of your own.
- skinkestek 4y ago
  Let me also add that this is a bigger problem than it needs to be. Why? Because countries insist on linking phone numbers to individuals. Why do I think this is borderline ridiculous? Because the phone system is still so open that any scammer can appear to call from any number, or even temporarily hijack reception of messages and calls.
- HelixEndeavor 4y ago
  Fragment? You mean Telegram's attempt to cash in on the cryptocoin scam, with their own walled-garden system and marketplace where it's currently hovering around $30 to buy a number, when it's genuinely cheaper to just get a Google Voice number or some prepaid burner phone number? Fragment, the service that is currently banned in the USA for being such an obvious scam?
  - freddie_mercury 4y ago
    Is it only $30? I just looked and all of the "ending soon" auctions have prices of $150 and up. With several of them at $4,000 and more. I know nothing about Fragment but I can only assume there's some kind of money laundering or other illegal activity involved to justify those prices.
    - konart 4y ago
      > With several of them at $4,000 and more ... to justify those prices. Those are nice looking ones. Some people spent great amounts of money to buy a nice phone number or a car plate (at least in Russia or Armenia for example). A car plate\registration number like M888MM 777 will cost you 10M rubles ~122k USD.
    - blep-arsh 4y ago
      It's just a crypto token exchange. Moreover, phone numbers it sells aren't "real", these are NFTs of phone numbers, nothing more. You can't use them for calls or anything else, there's no network service, the only purpose is Telegram authentication with an associated token.
  - herbst 4y ago
    They sell cosmetic services for their app I wonder how that classifies as scam? It's also a market so user sell to each other, is that scam too?
    - aww_dang 4y ago
      Wondering if the big players' app stores qualify as a scam under these terms, or if it is just more HN crypto-hate?
  - stiltzkin 4y ago
    Elaborate cryptocoin scam (I guess you are anti-crypto), buying with Fragment is anonymous and easier than Google Voice. I agree on being banned on U.S.A, blame that to bad crypto regulations.
- LeoPanthera 4y ago
  "This service is not available in the United States." No I can't.
- herbst 4y ago
  Or just rent a temporary phone number and lock the account with a password so it's yours forever. Costs like $0.2
Moldoteck 4y ago
And by default chats are not e2e encrypted. And even if you want e2e, it's not syncing between devices. Also groups are not e2e. Signal is cooler for encryption, heck, even fb messenger or Whatsapp. Featurewise yes, telegram is miles ahead
- skrowl 4y ago
  > it's not syncing between devices > Signal is cooler Clearly you haven't tried using Signal on multiple devices. It's terrible currently. Telegram / WhatsApp / etc work great on multiple devices.
  - solarkraft 4y ago
    (I'm partially utilizing Cunningham's law here) Because all the really security focused apps insist on per-device private keys, so everything has to be re-encrypted by everyone per the other users' device. This mitigates key leakage problems to some extent, but also makes the UX as awful as you describe. I don't understand why nobody (to my knowledge) has yet gone the middle route of having a private key per user. Sure, it's a bit less secure, but it's surely better than users preferring to use un(e2e)encrypted options instead?!
    - kitkat_new 4y ago
      Matrix has this as an option
    - NayamAmarshe 4y ago
      > I don't understand why nobody (to my knowledge) has yet gone the middle route of having a private key per user. That's what Telegram actually does with their cloud encryption.
  - Moldoteck 4y ago
    I said it's cooler for encrypted stuff compared to telegram not for features/ux. I use both and I'm fully aware telegram ux and easy of inter device operation is superior(well, they have some minor ux problems because of Premium but still, these are minor)
the_gipsy 4y ago
Matrix is an open protocol with real encryption. You can bridge telegram to it. It's all open source though, so don't expect an experience as polished as telegram.
- slondr 4y ago
  Telegram’s clients are also open source
  - the_gipsy 4y ago
    That's completely useless if the protocol is closed.
NayamAmarshe 4y ago
> but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. Because it's primarily a chat app, just like Signal or WhatsApp. They're more open than the alternatives but they still function with the old app-first philosophy.

konart 4y ago

>mobile number as a login/username Well, you can buy a number (+888) on fragment and use one instead of your own.

skinkestek 4y ago
Let me also add that this is a bigger problem than it needs to be. Why? Because countries insist on linking phone numbers to individuals. Why do I think this is borderline ridiculous? Because the phone system is still so open that any scammer can appear to call from any number, or even temporarily hijack reception of messages and calls.
HelixEndeavor 4y ago
Fragment? You mean Telegram's attempt to cash in on the cryptocoin scam, with their own walled-garden system and marketplace where it's currently hovering around $30 to buy a number, when it's genuinely cheaper to just get a Google Voice number or some prepaid burner phone number? Fragment, the service that is currently banned in the USA for being such an obvious scam?
- freddie_mercury 4y ago
  Is it only $30? I just looked and all of the "ending soon" auctions have prices of $150 and up. With several of them at $4,000 and more. I know nothing about Fragment but I can only assume there's some kind of money laundering or other illegal activity involved to justify those prices.
  - konart 4y ago
    > With several of them at $4,000 and more ... to justify those prices. Those are nice looking ones. Some people spent great amounts of money to buy a nice phone number or a car plate (at least in Russia or Armenia for example). A car plate\registration number like M888MM 777 will cost you 10M rubles ~122k USD.
  - blep-arsh 4y ago
    It's just a crypto token exchange. Moreover, phone numbers it sells aren't "real", these are NFTs of phone numbers, nothing more. You can't use them for calls or anything else, there's no network service, the only purpose is Telegram authentication with an associated token.
- herbst 4y ago
  They sell cosmetic services for their app I wonder how that classifies as scam? It's also a market so user sell to each other, is that scam too?
  - aww_dang 4y ago
    Wondering if the big players' app stores qualify as a scam under these terms, or if it is just more HN crypto-hate?
- stiltzkin 4y ago
  Elaborate cryptocoin scam (I guess you are anti-crypto), buying with Fragment is anonymous and easier than Google Voice. I agree on being banned on U.S.A, blame that to bad crypto regulations.
LeoPanthera 4y ago
"This service is not available in the United States." No I can't.
herbst 4y ago
Or just rent a temporary phone number and lock the account with a password so it's yours forever. Costs like $0.2

Moldoteck 4y ago

And by default chats are not e2e encrypted. And even if you want e2e, it's not syncing between devices. Also groups are not e2e. Signal is cooler for encryption, heck, even fb messenger or Whatsapp. Featurewise yes, telegram is miles ahead

skrowl 4y ago
> it's not syncing between devices > Signal is cooler Clearly you haven't tried using Signal on multiple devices. It's terrible currently. Telegram / WhatsApp / etc work great on multiple devices.
- solarkraft 4y ago
  (I'm partially utilizing Cunningham's law here) Because all the really security focused apps insist on per-device private keys, so everything has to be re-encrypted by everyone per the other users' device. This mitigates key leakage problems to some extent, but also makes the UX as awful as you describe. I don't understand why nobody (to my knowledge) has yet gone the middle route of having a private key per user. Sure, it's a bit less secure, but it's surely better than users preferring to use un(e2e)encrypted options instead?!
  - kitkat_new 4y ago
    Matrix has this as an option
  - NayamAmarshe 4y ago
    > I don't understand why nobody (to my knowledge) has yet gone the middle route of having a private key per user. That's what Telegram actually does with their cloud encryption.
- Moldoteck 4y ago
  I said it's cooler for encrypted stuff compared to telegram not for features/ux. I use both and I'm fully aware telegram ux and easy of inter device operation is superior(well, they have some minor ux problems because of Premium but still, these are minor)

the_gipsy 4y ago

Matrix is an open protocol with real encryption. You can bridge telegram to it. It's all open source though, so don't expect an experience as polished as telegram.

slondr 4y ago
Telegram’s clients are also open source
- the_gipsy 4y ago
  That's completely useless if the protocol is closed.

NayamAmarshe 4y ago

> but telegram always demands an app install for account creation. Because it's primarily a chat app, just like Signal or WhatsApp. They're more open than the alternatives but they still function with the old app-first philosophy.