30 ms·

One detail that's missing from the English article is why he got arrested. The French article mentions: Why was he under threat of a search warrant? The Just

by jfim 2y ago

One detail that's missing from the English article is why he got arrested. The French article mentions: Why was he under threat of a search warrant? The Justice considers that the absence of moderation, cooperation with law enforcement and the tools offered by Telegram (disposable numbers, cryptocurrencies...) makes him an accomplice to drug trafficking, child-crime offenses and swindling.

squidbeak 2y ago
> TF1 and BFM both said the investigation was focused on a lack of moderators on Telegram, and that police considered that this situation allowed criminal activity to go on undeterred on the messaging app. (From the reuters link)
nextos 2y ago
Does this mean that according to EU, or France, E2E-encrypted platforms need to "cooperate" (provide backdoors)? Or does it refer to public channels only?
- mikae1 2y ago
  > Does this mean that according to EU, or France, E2E-encrypted platforms need to "cooperate" (provide backdoors)? No, not yet. > Or does it refer to public channels only? On Telegram channels and groups are not E2EE. I'd assume that's were most of the crap is spread.
  - tillulen 2y ago
    Private messages aren’t end-to-end encrypted either. The so-called secret chats are end-to-end encrypted but are a major pain to use. I doubt that feature sees much use.
    - mikae1 2y ago
      Yes, private messages can be E2EE. But as you say, they're a hassle (no sync between devices as an example).
- b112 2y ago
  It means the post office is next, followed by the phone company.
  - kspacewalk2 2y ago
    The post office and the phone company refuse to cooperate with law enforcement and offer disposable phone numbers and means to move money without trace/attribution?
  - dundercoder 2y ago
    The phone company has long cooperated with government. And while I’ve never heard of anything, the post office _is_ owned by the government in the US.
  - philistine 2y ago
    If you think the governments of the world do not have the metadata of every single phone call and at the very least an outside picture of every letter being sent by non-companies, then I have a boat te sell you.
  - qingcharles 2y ago
    There is a legal process, though, at least in the USA. You can get a warrant (a court order) to open a piece of mail, and the USPS isn't going to refuse to hand it over. [technically they could, but someone would get stuck with contempt of court charges]
- rtsil 2y ago
  It means complying with an order from a judge. Just like every other social media or really any form of communications (including emails, phone calls, letters) that operate in France (and in the EU) do.
- riedel 2y ago
  As said before: the whole E2E, CSAM diskussion is not really the issue here. This is afaik about complying mostly to very specific takedown requests (as telegram offers no legal address inside the EU) and more general platform regulations that require mechanisms to prevent illegal content. Telegram does not offer any E2E encrypted group chat and actually actively interferes in groups by pushing advertisements, so they should be able to also block illegal content. Having said that I am no fan of installing law enforcement inside private companies. However, telegrams noncompliance with court orders is problematic particularly related to protecting human rights of 3rd parties in the digital age.
mouse_ 2y ago
So they're going for the ISPs too, then? Considering the drug traffickers, child crime offenders and swindlers were actually paying the ISPs, NOT telegram.
tamimio 2y ago
Just because he is the CEO doesn’t mean he is directly liable. The company is a separate entity. I don’t see anyone arresting Elon or other CEOs because of “not enough moderation.” Most actions are to block platform access. There must be something else for sure.
- ffsm8 2y ago
  Twitter doesn't encrypt messages, so there is indeed no chance of that happening - after all the reasoning for this arrest is fundamentally inapplicable to Twitter. It's however a very very very slippery slope to prosecute someone for providing the tools to hold encrypted communication, just because this is also used by criminals. A lot of privacy oriented services would probably have to exit France if this holds up
  - d3m0t3p 2y ago
    by default telegram doesn't encrypt anything. I'm not sure if you where implying that telegram had encryption and therefore hiding illicite activities. The problems is the huge telegram channels spreading hacks and illicite tricks. There is no such threats against Signal which is way more privacy oriented. (except for some new laws in UK where Signal said if they are applied, they would withdraw from the UK market:https://fortune.com/2023/07/13/signal-president-mass-surveillance-uk-law/ https://fortune.com/2023/07/13/signal-president-mass-surveil...
- darkhorn 2y ago
  Elon Mustk is a very important person; Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, Twitter. He provides services to the military with the Starlink and he is deeply connected to the state with SpaceX. On the other hand Pavel Durov is "homeless". He is like a normal citizen.
- layer8 2y ago
  CEOs can be liable for intentional or grossly negligent non-compliance, among other things.
  - 2y ago

by jfim 2y ago

squidbeak 2y ago

> TF1 and BFM both said the investigation was focused on a lack of moderators on Telegram, and that police considered that this situation allowed criminal activity to go on undeterred on the messaging app. (From the reuters link)

nextos 2y ago

Does this mean that according to EU, or France, E2E-encrypted platforms need to "cooperate" (provide backdoors)? Or does it refer to public channels only?

mikae1 2y ago
> Does this mean that according to EU, or France, E2E-encrypted platforms need to "cooperate" (provide backdoors)? No, not yet. > Or does it refer to public channels only? On Telegram channels and groups are not E2EE. I'd assume that's were most of the crap is spread.
- tillulen 2y ago
  Private messages aren’t end-to-end encrypted either. The so-called secret chats are end-to-end encrypted but are a major pain to use. I doubt that feature sees much use.
  - mikae1 2y ago
    Yes, private messages can be E2EE. But as you say, they're a hassle (no sync between devices as an example).
b112 2y ago
It means the post office is next, followed by the phone company.
- kspacewalk2 2y ago
  The post office and the phone company refuse to cooperate with law enforcement and offer disposable phone numbers and means to move money without trace/attribution?
- dundercoder 2y ago
  The phone company has long cooperated with government. And while I’ve never heard of anything, the post office _is_ owned by the government in the US.
- philistine 2y ago
  If you think the governments of the world do not have the metadata of every single phone call and at the very least an outside picture of every letter being sent by non-companies, then I have a boat te sell you.
- qingcharles 2y ago
  There is a legal process, though, at least in the USA. You can get a warrant (a court order) to open a piece of mail, and the USPS isn't going to refuse to hand it over. [technically they could, but someone would get stuck with contempt of court charges]
rtsil 2y ago
It means complying with an order from a judge. Just like every other social media or really any form of communications (including emails, phone calls, letters) that operate in France (and in the EU) do.
riedel 2y ago
As said before: the whole E2E, CSAM diskussion is not really the issue here. This is afaik about complying mostly to very specific takedown requests (as telegram offers no legal address inside the EU) and more general platform regulations that require mechanisms to prevent illegal content. Telegram does not offer any E2E encrypted group chat and actually actively interferes in groups by pushing advertisements, so they should be able to also block illegal content. Having said that I am no fan of installing law enforcement inside private companies. However, telegrams noncompliance with court orders is problematic particularly related to protecting human rights of 3rd parties in the digital age.

mouse_ 2y ago

So they're going for the ISPs too, then? Considering the drug traffickers, child crime offenders and swindlers were actually paying the ISPs, NOT telegram.

tamimio 2y ago

Just because he is the CEO doesn’t mean he is directly liable. The company is a separate entity. I don’t see anyone arresting Elon or other CEOs because of “not enough moderation.” Most actions are to block platform access. There must be something else for sure.

ffsm8 2y ago
Twitter doesn't encrypt messages, so there is indeed no chance of that happening - after all the reasoning for this arrest is fundamentally inapplicable to Twitter. It's however a very very very slippery slope to prosecute someone for providing the tools to hold encrypted communication, just because this is also used by criminals. A lot of privacy oriented services would probably have to exit France if this holds up
- d3m0t3p 2y ago
  by default telegram doesn't encrypt anything. I'm not sure if you where implying that telegram had encryption and therefore hiding illicite activities. The problems is the huge telegram channels spreading hacks and illicite tricks. There is no such threats against Signal which is way more privacy oriented. (except for some new laws in UK where Signal said if they are applied, they would withdraw from the UK market:https://fortune.com/2023/07/13/signal-president-mass-surveillance-uk-law/ https://fortune.com/2023/07/13/signal-president-mass-surveil...
darkhorn 2y ago
Elon Mustk is a very important person; Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, Twitter. He provides services to the military with the Starlink and he is deeply connected to the state with SpaceX. On the other hand Pavel Durov is "homeless". He is like a normal citizen.
layer8 2y ago
CEOs can be liable for intentional or grossly negligent non-compliance, among other things.
- 2y ago