12 ms·

The Arrest of Pavel Durov Is a Reminder That Telegram Is Not Encrypted

147 points by rntn 2y ago

personomas 2y ago
[dead]
aeternum 2y ago
When it comes down to it, practical encryption no longer exists. Every operating system now phones home and uploads copious event logs. Many users install custom "swipe" keyboards, ad blockers, toolbars, and even bios chips are now programmable. There are just so many vectors and exfiltration paths, plus it's not enough for you to secure them all. The person you are talking to must also. Often encrypted messaging gives a false sense of security. Messages can still be intercepted on either end, and an automatic app update is sufficient to silently disable the encryption without the user knowing. edit: Since it seems that some are considering this baseless fear-mongering, here's just one recent example: https://citizenlab.ca/2023/09/blastpass-nso-group-iphone-zero-click-zero-day-exploit-captured-in-the-wild/ https://citizenlab.ca/2023/09/blastpass-nso-group-iphone-zer... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware)
- mdhb 2y ago
  Sometimes it’s ok to not comment on topics you only know a little bit about.
  - aeternum 2y ago
    Why not point out which parts of my comment you feel are incorrect?
- rowanG077 2y ago
  What is my Linux OS supposed to phone home to? Linus torvalds build machine?
  - honestjohn 2y ago
    You mean you didn't install the Yahoo! translation extension to your kernel?
  - aeternum 2y ago
    What percentage of Telegram users access it exclusively via Linux?
    - rowanG077 2y ago
      This is what you said, among others: > Every operating system now phones home and uploads copious event logs. There is nothing about telegram in there.
      - aeternum 2y ago
        Linux distros are much better but they can still phone home. Here's one example: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuPopularityContest https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuPopularityContest For awhile Canonical had a deal with Amazon that was highly questionable. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ubuntu-spyware.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ubuntu-spyware.en.html The most dangerous however is the auto-updates. Even if the software is safe today, how do you know what tomorrow's auto-update will bring?
  - squarefoot 2y ago
    Whoever forced it to use binary only blobs, like those employed by every wireless network card, can instruct it to exfiltrate users data to be sent anywhere, be it the manufacturers' or whichever entity they're controlled by. Closed chipsets not using blobs aren't immune either as malicious firmware can be implemented in iron only. Sadly, we can't completely trust any system without total software and hardware openness, at least in all subsystems that deal with sensitive data.
    - dvdkon 2y ago
      Nowadays NICs only have access to encrypted packets, so such a backdoor would have to be in the CPU. I'm not saying such a thing doesn't exist, but I think it's pretty clear its use would have to be very targeted for nobody to have noticed so far (unless there's a grand conspiracy between all computers to hide clandestine Ethernet traffic).
- beefnugs 2y ago
  these are all reasons to be more cognizant about it. Try to use lineage or grapheneOS, minimize software installs on important computers. Have multiple more segregated and specialized computers running. Whitelist only networking, network overlays.
rwaksmunski 2y ago
Motorola radios marketed at law enforcement have flawed AES encryption and can be decrypted in near real time. You are delusional if you think your consumer phone or any app on it is more secure than that.
- honestjohn 2y ago
  It's delusional to think a modern technology is more secure than an old Motorola radio used by local law enforcement?
- rsynnott 2y ago
  ... I mean virtually any modern encryption is going to be more secure than TETRA. TETRA is from 1995, and the non-European export version wasn't even supposed to be secure _in 1995_.
- cristoperb 2y ago
  I think my messages sent over e2e encrypted chat with expiring session keys (like Signal) is more secure than broadcasting on radios with known weaknesses. Can you explain briefly why I'm wrong/"delusional"?
  - rwaksmunski 2y ago
    Sure, Signal encryption is better implemented than Motorola's. That means nothing when your device can be cracked with something like Pegasus without any interaction form you.
    - DyslexicAtheist 2y ago
      Protection against 0-click commercial exploit chains like Pegasus, that cost thousands to maintain, can not be done with just switching to another messenger app. If that is part of your threat model IMO better to have good OpSec understanding and continuous training in compartmentalization. Ideally travel guidelines and dedicated devices. Most journalists/activists don't even have that (sadly). So the argument to just use better Technology is a dud because no amount of tech can solve them from themselves. (poorly) Paraphrasing Grugq: > Good OpSec will get you through a time of compromised encryption better than good encryption gets you through a time of poor OpSec. Software based encryption (not using HW backed) appeals if the threat-model needs to protect against the case where you think (or know) the hw might be broken e.g. in your given example AES. That claim might be true especially when you're trying to build a solid solution without control of the hardware or the underlying OS (like e2e mobile messengers trying). That would be a good reason to ditch HW based encryption. But unless you fully trust the OS or the hardware, or your own ability to compartmentalize (which IMHO you should not), why put trust in an app running on top of all this compromised garbage :D
applejuice539 2y ago
[flagged]
daft_pink 2y ago
I sort of assumed that a messaging app based in Russia should probably not be used unless you were okay with Russia reading your messages, which is currently considered an enemy state in most western countries. It totally shocks me that so many pro Ukrainian influencers use Telegram. I feel that this is a pretty good summary of what's going on: https://youtu.be/39rBzRd4M0k https://youtu.be/39rBzRd4M0k and explains how the encryption works etc.
- konart 2y ago
  Telegram is not based in Russia.
  - hughesjj 2y ago
    To be fair it's not really based anywhere. The legal headquarters are in the Virgin Islands and the ops HQ is now in Dubai. Saying telegram is based in Russia is like saying the pirate bay is based in Sweden. Used to be true, but not so much anymore. Regardless, I think it's totally reasonable to be concerned about having shared symmetric cryptography keys stored on servers in Russia while claiming your app is 'secure'/end to end encrypted (not sure if they're claiming the latter anymore or if that was even official claims to begin with vs internet BS), and is especially relevant for Ukranians or Russians politically opposed to Putin.
    - throwaway48540 2y ago
      Don't use non-secure chats for your communication, then. Telegram is not just a chat app, it's also used somewhat like Facebook. Are you concerned that Facebook can see posts and comments? Facebook can also see your chats, there is no option to E2E encrypt them, unlike Telegram.
      - _djo_ 2y ago
        Meta added end-to-end encryption to Messenger some time ago. [0] [0] https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/1084673321594605 https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/1084673321594605
janmo 2y ago
The title is not correct IMO, it is not "end-to-end encrypted" by default. But the traffic between you and the Telegram server is always encrypted and the "end-to-end encryption" can be enabled.
- brnt 2y ago
  Telegram appears to be the last company selling SSL as "encryption" though. In 2024 that's akin to claiming that your car doesn't need oil every 500km, foodproduct has a reasonably predictable shelf life or tap water is safe for consumption. It's all great, also arguments a generation old. Maybe I should add 'literate' on my resume too...
  - cocodill 2y ago
    https://core.telegram.org/api/end-to-end https://core.telegram.org/api/end-to-end
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - Djdjur7373bb 2y ago
    Genuinely curious.. in what sense do you not consider SSL to be encryption?
    - mr_mitm 2y ago
      In the sense that SSL in 2024 is the bare minimum and goes without saying, so when talking about encryption we mean e2ee.
      - rvnx 2y ago
        and also, a lot of the "HTTPS" encryption is only encryption until the Cloudflare edge node.
    - rsynnott 2y ago
steideler 2y ago
Why are these popping out now? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350530
- lxgr 2y ago
  Telegram's founder/CEO got arrested in France yesterday.
sunaookami 2y ago
It also doesn't mean "plain text". Telegram uses MTProto and the decryption keys are stored on multiple servers in multiple jurisdictions, something which Gizmodo doesn't even mention. See also this excellent comment by another HN user: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41348228 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41348228
- zitterbewegung 2y ago
  Also, since you can see scroll back don't they host the telegram chats even if they are in encrypted form?
- DyslexicAtheist 2y ago
  Here is a better resource by an actual respected cryptographer: https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram-is-not-really-an-encrypted-messaging-app/ https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram... One of the links shared by the comment you're linking to points to a paper which concludes: > We have presented the formalisation of the MTProto 2.0 protocol suite in the applied π-calculus, and its analysis using the protocol verifier ProVerif. This approach adopts the symbolic Dolev-Yao threat model: an active intruder can intercept, modify, forward, drop, replay or reflect any message. Within this model, we have provided a fully automated proof of the soundness of MTProto 2.0’s protocols for first authentication, normal chat, end-to-end encrypted chat, and rekeying mechanisms with respect to several security properties, including authentication, integrity, secrecy and perfect forward secrecy, also in the presence of malicious servers and clients. Moreover, we have discovered that the rekeying protocol is vulnerable to a theoretical unknown key-share (UKS) attack [ 5 ]: a malicious client B, with the help of another client E, can induce a client A to believe that she (still) shares a secret key with E, and instead A shares the key with B. The practical exploitability of this attack in actual implementations is still to be investigated. Our formalization covers also the behaviour of the users, when relevant; e.g., if the users do not check the fingerprints of their shared keys, a MitM attack is possible.
- lxgr 2y ago
  > the decryption keys are stored on multiple servers in multiple jurisdictions Which is completely besides the point when the question is "should you trust Telegram", given that they are still entirely under Telegram's logical control. The only circumstance under which this is a meaningful difference is when somebody other than Telegram (law enforcement with a warrant, law enforcement without a warrant, criminals etc.) walks into a data center and pulls those servers' hard disks.
kgeist 2y ago
>Telegram is mostly about big group chats and channels where people share information with their fans. This is the gist of it. Telegram is mostly like an uncensored blog platform at this point. Probably the only platform to host official channels of Navalny, Zelenski, Dmitry Medvedev, Russian and Ukrainian milbloggers at the same time. And for public channels, E2E is pointless - everyone can see it anyway.
- attendant3446 2y ago
  And that's great. But Telegram promotes itself as a secure messenger. And that's a big lie. If they would advertise themselves as a WeChat / Line for the West, nobody would question it.
  - diggan 2y ago
    > And that's great. But Telegram promotes itself as a secure messenger. And that's a big lie. But until someone actually published any hard evidence demonstrating weaknesses (ideally with a PoC), do we have anything else to go by? I wouldn't say I know for sure Telegram is 100% secure against government interception, but I also wouldn't claim the opposite, because neither ends/claims have been demonstrated and proven in a verifiably way.
    - fsflover 2y ago
      > But until someone actually published any hard evidence demonstrating weaknesses (ideally with a PoC), do we have anything else to go by? Here you go: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350809 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350809
      - diggan 2y ago
        How does that prove that Telegram as a whole is not secure? The only thing that would demonstrate is that your normal, not-E2E encrypted, messages aren't E2E encrypted, which yeah, of course they aren't. I think you might confuse what the mud puddle test aims to demonstrate. It's to be able to confirm E2E encryption, which if you do that test with Telegram + Secret Chats (which is the E2E encryption feature in Telegram), you'll see you cannot recover those messages.
upofadown 2y ago
An encrypted system can depend on a trusted third party. Sometimes that trust is mandatory, like, say, a XMPP system used in an industry where IM messages have to be archived for future possible access to a regulator. Such systems are much easier for the user to use securely. Most end to end capable systems degrade to trusting the provider when the user fails to verify the identity of their correspondent using some ridiculously long number. In other words, the user has to take an assertive action to become fully end to end where only the end users are trusted. Just like with Telegram secret chats. You can't just claim that such systems are not encrypted. Things are more subtle. The headline here ("Telegram Is Not Encrypted") is misleading...
- lxgr 2y ago
  > The headline here ("Telegram Is Not Encrypted") is misleading... To an audience of laypersons, it's definitely much more accurate than saying "Telegram is encrypted". Maybe a better way of phrasing it would be "Telegram can read your messages if they choose to, or if anybody is able to force them".
  - worik 2y ago
    > "Telegram can read your messages if they choose to, or if anybody is able to force them". Exactly. I.e: Telegram is not encrypted.
nostalgk 2y ago
I once visited Moscow for a AI coding jam sponsored by the Russian state, and while I was there, there was a Telegram group for all of the students to use to communicate during the jam. This Telegram channel was set up by the state officials. A small section of Russian students were floored, and responded that they thought Telegram was banned in the country at the time (circa 2017-2018). The state officials laughed and responded that it wasn't any concern because they could read everything in any chat they wanted. I've avoided the app ever since. I can't say how, why, or when the app became compromised, but anecdotally, I was told that it was and that it was no longer a concern in Russia. Maybe it was some dry joke, maybe those students were woefully misinformed, who knows. But it certainly broke any confidence I had in the security of any existing messaging app. I personally use Signal, but that's mostly just because I have personal friends who use it and it's convenient to use on my PC. Edit: Kinda funny, I only just logged into this site again, and some of my last previous comments were about the same thing.
- Zamicol 2y ago
  Signal's larger problem is the lack of a web client. Telegram (like everyone else) has a great, responsive web client. What's even more frustrating is that Signals desktop app is just an electron app, meaning it's generally designed for the browser.
  - siva7 2y ago
    Signals problem is they are too extreme on the security aspect neglecting everything else but a messaging app is much more than one feature to be considered a serious alternative for the masses. It hasn't even solved backup of your chats as a basic feature because it's not important to their developers but a non-negotiable feature for the majority of chat app users.
    - shric 2y ago
      Strange, I've been using Signal for years and its backup feature works just fine: 1. Enable backups. 2. Point it at a folder on your phone which gets synchronized somewhere 3. Note the 30 digit passphrase in your password manager. https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba... Have had no issue restoring to replacement phones.
FpUser 2y ago
>"sperm-obsessed co-founder of Telegram" >"possible vector for child sex abuse material" >"hub for various scams and crimes—but" What is it? Setting up a mood to make sure people feel that Durov / Telegram are bad? This is anything but even a try to objective journalism. Whoever the author is - fuck you.
- cholantesh 2y ago
  It's a tech blog, not that 'objective journalism' exists anyway.
  - FpUser 2y ago
    That is why I said "try to objective journalism". We are all biased to a various degrees. But this particular one feels like puke. Does not matter if it is tech blog.
    - cholantesh 2y ago
      Firstly, a blog is an opinion piece, so that you went in expecting 'objective journalism' is quixotic. Secondly, even if it weren't opinion, journalism does not aspire to objectivity to begin with.
      - FpUser 2y ago
        >"Firstly, a blog is an opinion piece" Well, let me rephrase it then. I respect author's right to express the opinion. Still "fuck said opinion". It reeks.
- kome 2y ago
  that's absolutely shameful
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
I wonder if developers of Tor or Matrix, which are far more popular among shady dealers as a percentage of regular users, were arrested. A storm would follow. In Durov's case - crickets. No EFF for you.
- mr_mitm 2y ago
  If those developers offer a platform while simultaneously not sufficiently moderating activities, then probably.
  - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
    Sure they offer a platform. And they moderate nothing.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  Those are _actually_ e2e encrypted, so cannot moderate. Which is a much better defence than "well, we vaguely imply that our thing is e2e encrypted, but it's not, but also we don't moderate anyway".
d0mine 2y ago
The encryption is a red herring to distract from the truth: telegram is the only platform where views different from war profiteers can be expressed. You can't do it anywhere else: not on cnn, not bbc, not guardian, not bloomberg, ..., not fox news, not npr, not reddit, not medium, not in a french court that rubberstamps whatever overseas masters tell them.
- qsdf38100 2y ago
  What about Twitter ?
  - d0mine 2y ago
    If you are a nobody, you can shout any nonsense there. It is an outrage machine: very useful for "divide & conquer" type of governance
- lxgr 2y ago
  If Telegram only wanted to be a "free-speech maximalist-like" platform, they could have simply skipped all of the misinformation around also being a "secure and encrypted" instant messenger. The fact that they did all of that is precisely the reason why you'll find so many cryptographers and privacy advocates being very critical of it.
- worik 2y ago
  > telegram is the only platform where views different from war profiteers can be expressed That is a strong, wrong, statement For one thing, although I have my quibbles about the standard of journalism at The Guardian, I do not think for a micro second they are beholden to "war profiteers".
- squidbeak 2y ago
  Opposing Russia's belligerence and atrocities in Ukraine doesn't make you a war profiteer. Telegram footage from Russian channels has actually been key to understanding how obscenely common those outrages are.
Beijinger 2y ago
I have no idea if it is encrypted or not. Always thought it is. But I think of offering a commercial service of something my buddy is currently offering for free on a smaller scale. And there have been police inquiries. I am US based and have a US passport. I wonder if I would have to respond to police inquiries. When is this enough, and when would I need a court order? And do I have to respond to foreign police inquiries. Demand a court order? And accept one from France, what is next? Russia? China? North Korea? I think in the end it was his French Passport that killed him. Now there are not so many options for him: He can help with providing a kind of key, backdoor whatever and can walk or gets a small sentence. I thought Telegram is encrypted and if done, in the right way, he could not provide help at all, but this seems not the case. The other option is that he asks for help from Russia. I am sure Putin could get him out in 1-2 years. Trust me, Putin has his ways with this, see Vadim Krasikov. :-) Let's hope he plays his cards wisely. Good luck.
wkat4242 2y ago
Yeah I kinda wonder why they don't end to end encrypt telegram, this would take them out of a lot of hot water with the authorities. Because the situation would be the same as with Signal and WhatsApp: What they can't see they can't moderate. Of course telegram is actually encrypted, but just not end to end. Except the secret chat function which is very limited (only works between 2 participants, only between 2 devices and everyone needs to be online at the same time for the key exchange to work).
- skeledrew 2y ago
  E2ee would break the convenience of instantly searching across 100s of conversations with potentially millions of messages, something I and millions of other users take advantage of everyday.
  - wkat4242 2y ago
    Not necessarily. There are techniques to search encrypted data on a server without having said server know what it's actually searching for: https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~dawnsong/papers/se.pdf https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~dawnsong/papers/se.pdf You could also maintain an index locally.
    - skeledrew 2y ago
      Yes there are PoC techniques out there. How do they stand up in practical circumstances though? Who's using any of these techniques at scale and what's the UX like? Something that's very nice about TG search is that it stems the terms, so if for example I search for "deleted", I also get results containing "deletes" and "delete". There is also search by username and by date. How would those be affected? Why would I want to maintain a local index? How much of my compute and storage will it take? How well will it work across all my devices and clients (I have 3 clients just on my phone)? I personally am a part of over 700 conversions, some having millions of messages, and many of which I rarely interact with, but when I do, I know I have easy, instant access. It sounds highly inconvenient that I should have to constantly maintain any of that for the few times I may want to dive in to check on something and get out again. Might as well those conversations never existed in the first place. And of course these considerations aren't just for me, but the nearly 1 billion users of the platform.
cryptonector 2y ago
That's funny because the French government is accusing him of: - Fourniture de prestations de cryptologie visant à assurer des fonctions de confidentialité sans déclaration conforme, Providing cryptography services with an eye to ensure confidentiality features without a compliance declaration. (Translation mine.) - Fourniture d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable, Providing a cryptographic method non-exclusively ensuring authentication and integrity features w/o prior declaration. (Translation mine.) - Importation d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable. Same, but regarding import controls. The first item implies that you're not allowed to provide others with software/services that provides confidentiality protection without registration -- without a statement that you comply with legal requirements! Presumably the compliance declaration is subject to prosecution for perjury or similar charges if they can twist the legal requirements after your registration. The second item implies that you're not allowed to provide others even with something as innocuous as authentication and integrity protection software/services without first registering your intent to do so!! In the context of the cryptowars of the 90s, and in the context of web browsers, all of this is just pure nonsense. Where are the prosecutions of Mozilla, Google, and Apple (and Brave, and Opera, and...) for distributing browsers which all provide confidentiality services? Or did they all get approval from the French government?
- lxgr 2y ago
  It's worth noting that the US still has such a law on the books as well apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th... > Or did they all get approval from the French government? Presumably, since it seems to largely be a formality at this point. I'm also very disappointed to see it being used in this case, since otherwise nothing in these charges is about cryptography.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    Export controls on crypto are one thing, and easily avoided by using open source (since there is an exemption for open source). But import controls are much more obnoxious and harder to deal with.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
saos 2y ago
That’s my fustration with Telegram. When it comes to ui/ux is beats WhatsApp day and night. But the encryption by default is so so disappointing
mrkramer 2y ago
I never trusted Telegram; who are their founders, what is their corporate structure and management style, what are their values and vision? Nor do I trust any other centralized messaging app. P2P FTW. Cryptography is the only salvation.
kkfx 2y ago
Just a small note: even if Telegram would be encrypted end to end, most people use it with a mobile app, writing messages with the OS virtual keyboard, inserting images/video from the OS internal storage. How can anyone think an app could be private on a closed source, remotely managed, OS it run on it's definitively not? How can anyone think a damn picture on an Android/iOS/* phone could be considered private? People have Google Photos/iCloud auto-backups and do care about "the privacy of a messaging app"? Beside that I do consider this arrests much less meaningful than most current press, yes it's a debatable act, but so far Telegram works in France, there is no state-enforced block, in user base size terms it's hardly be considered a significant hostile political/social actor, and actually the government is doing MUCH bigger things against the République and Democracy at a whole than arresting the funder of a messaging services based in Dubai...
- rsynnott 2y ago
  I mean, I assume people who are seriously concerned with privacy to a sufficient extent don't turn on those auto backups (though at least the Apple one _does_ have an e2e encryption option).
stiltzkin 2y ago
[dead]
_imnothere 2y ago
Wrong title. Not Encrypted (x) Not "Fully" Encrypted (o)

147 points by rntn 2y ago

[dead]

When it comes down to it, practical encryption no longer exists. Every operating system now phones home and uploads copious event logs. Many users install custom "swipe" keyboards, ad blockers, toolbars, and even bios chips are now programmable. There are just so many vectors and exfiltration paths, plus it's not enough for you to secure them all. The person you are talking to must also. Often encrypted messaging gives a false sense of security. Messages can still be intercepted on either end, and an automatic app update is sufficient to silently disable the encryption without the user knowing. edit: Since it seems that some are considering this baseless fear-mongering, here's just one recent example: https://citizenlab.ca/2023/09/blastpass-nso-group-iphone-zero-click-zero-day-exploit-captured-in-the-wild/ https://citizenlab.ca/2023/09/blastpass-nso-group-iphone-zer... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware)

mdhb 2y ago
Sometimes it’s ok to not comment on topics you only know a little bit about.
- aeternum 2y ago
  Why not point out which parts of my comment you feel are incorrect?
rowanG077 2y ago
What is my Linux OS supposed to phone home to? Linus torvalds build machine?
- honestjohn 2y ago
  You mean you didn't install the Yahoo! translation extension to your kernel?
- aeternum 2y ago
  What percentage of Telegram users access it exclusively via Linux?
  - rowanG077 2y ago
    This is what you said, among others: > Every operating system now phones home and uploads copious event logs. There is nothing about telegram in there.
    - aeternum 2y ago
      Linux distros are much better but they can still phone home. Here's one example: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuPopularityContest https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuPopularityContest For awhile Canonical had a deal with Amazon that was highly questionable. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ubuntu-spyware.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ubuntu-spyware.en.html The most dangerous however is the auto-updates. Even if the software is safe today, how do you know what tomorrow's auto-update will bring?
- squarefoot 2y ago
  Whoever forced it to use binary only blobs, like those employed by every wireless network card, can instruct it to exfiltrate users data to be sent anywhere, be it the manufacturers' or whichever entity they're controlled by. Closed chipsets not using blobs aren't immune either as malicious firmware can be implemented in iron only. Sadly, we can't completely trust any system without total software and hardware openness, at least in all subsystems that deal with sensitive data.
  - dvdkon 2y ago
    Nowadays NICs only have access to encrypted packets, so such a backdoor would have to be in the CPU. I'm not saying such a thing doesn't exist, but I think it's pretty clear its use would have to be very targeted for nobody to have noticed so far (unless there's a grand conspiracy between all computers to hide clandestine Ethernet traffic).
beefnugs 2y ago
these are all reasons to be more cognizant about it. Try to use lineage or grapheneOS, minimize software installs on important computers. Have multiple more segregated and specialized computers running. Whitelist only networking, network overlays.

rwaksmunski 2y ago

Motorola radios marketed at law enforcement have flawed AES encryption and can be decrypted in near real time. You are delusional if you think your consumer phone or any app on it is more secure than that.

honestjohn 2y ago
It's delusional to think a modern technology is more secure than an old Motorola radio used by local law enforcement?
rsynnott 2y ago
... I mean virtually any modern encryption is going to be more secure than TETRA. TETRA is from 1995, and the non-European export version wasn't even supposed to be secure _in 1995_.
cristoperb 2y ago
I think my messages sent over e2e encrypted chat with expiring session keys (like Signal) is more secure than broadcasting on radios with known weaknesses. Can you explain briefly why I'm wrong/"delusional"?
- rwaksmunski 2y ago
  Sure, Signal encryption is better implemented than Motorola's. That means nothing when your device can be cracked with something like Pegasus without any interaction form you.
  - DyslexicAtheist 2y ago
    Protection against 0-click commercial exploit chains like Pegasus, that cost thousands to maintain, can not be done with just switching to another messenger app. If that is part of your threat model IMO better to have good OpSec understanding and continuous training in compartmentalization. Ideally travel guidelines and dedicated devices. Most journalists/activists don't even have that (sadly). So the argument to just use better Technology is a dud because no amount of tech can solve them from themselves. (poorly) Paraphrasing Grugq: > Good OpSec will get you through a time of compromised encryption better than good encryption gets you through a time of poor OpSec. Software based encryption (not using HW backed) appeals if the threat-model needs to protect against the case where you think (or know) the hw might be broken e.g. in your given example AES. That claim might be true especially when you're trying to build a solid solution without control of the hardware or the underlying OS (like e2e mobile messengers trying). That would be a good reason to ditch HW based encryption. But unless you fully trust the OS or the hardware, or your own ability to compartmentalize (which IMHO you should not), why put trust in an app running on top of all this compromised garbage :D

applejuice539 2y ago

[flagged]

daft_pink 2y ago

I sort of assumed that a messaging app based in Russia should probably not be used unless you were okay with Russia reading your messages, which is currently considered an enemy state in most western countries. It totally shocks me that so many pro Ukrainian influencers use Telegram. I feel that this is a pretty good summary of what's going on: https://youtu.be/39rBzRd4M0k https://youtu.be/39rBzRd4M0k and explains how the encryption works etc.

konart 2y ago
Telegram is not based in Russia.
- hughesjj 2y ago
  To be fair it's not really based anywhere. The legal headquarters are in the Virgin Islands and the ops HQ is now in Dubai. Saying telegram is based in Russia is like saying the pirate bay is based in Sweden. Used to be true, but not so much anymore. Regardless, I think it's totally reasonable to be concerned about having shared symmetric cryptography keys stored on servers in Russia while claiming your app is 'secure'/end to end encrypted (not sure if they're claiming the latter anymore or if that was even official claims to begin with vs internet BS), and is especially relevant for Ukranians or Russians politically opposed to Putin.
  - throwaway48540 2y ago
    Don't use non-secure chats for your communication, then. Telegram is not just a chat app, it's also used somewhat like Facebook. Are you concerned that Facebook can see posts and comments? Facebook can also see your chats, there is no option to E2E encrypt them, unlike Telegram.
    - _djo_ 2y ago
      Meta added end-to-end encryption to Messenger some time ago. [0] [0] https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/1084673321594605 https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/1084673321594605

janmo 2y ago

The title is not correct IMO, it is not "end-to-end encrypted" by default. But the traffic between you and the Telegram server is always encrypted and the "end-to-end encryption" can be enabled.

brnt 2y ago
Telegram appears to be the last company selling SSL as "encryption" though. In 2024 that's akin to claiming that your car doesn't need oil every 500km, foodproduct has a reasonably predictable shelf life or tap water is safe for consumption. It's all great, also arguments a generation old. Maybe I should add 'literate' on my resume too...
- cocodill 2y ago
  https://core.telegram.org/api/end-to-end https://core.telegram.org/api/end-to-end
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- Djdjur7373bb 2y ago
  Genuinely curious.. in what sense do you not consider SSL to be encryption?
  - mr_mitm 2y ago
    In the sense that SSL in 2024 is the bare minimum and goes without saying, so when talking about encryption we mean e2ee.
    - rvnx 2y ago
      and also, a lot of the "HTTPS" encryption is only encryption until the Cloudflare edge node.
  - rsynnott 2y ago

steideler 2y ago

Why are these popping out now? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350530

lxgr 2y ago
Telegram's founder/CEO got arrested in France yesterday.

sunaookami 2y ago

It also doesn't mean "plain text". Telegram uses MTProto and the decryption keys are stored on multiple servers in multiple jurisdictions, something which Gizmodo doesn't even mention. See also this excellent comment by another HN user: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41348228 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41348228

zitterbewegung 2y ago
Also, since you can see scroll back don't they host the telegram chats even if they are in encrypted form?
DyslexicAtheist 2y ago
Here is a better resource by an actual respected cryptographer: https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram-is-not-really-an-encrypted-messaging-app/ https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram... One of the links shared by the comment you're linking to points to a paper which concludes: > We have presented the formalisation of the MTProto 2.0 protocol suite in the applied π-calculus, and its analysis using the protocol verifier ProVerif. This approach adopts the symbolic Dolev-Yao threat model: an active intruder can intercept, modify, forward, drop, replay or reflect any message. Within this model, we have provided a fully automated proof of the soundness of MTProto 2.0’s protocols for first authentication, normal chat, end-to-end encrypted chat, and rekeying mechanisms with respect to several security properties, including authentication, integrity, secrecy and perfect forward secrecy, also in the presence of malicious servers and clients. Moreover, we have discovered that the rekeying protocol is vulnerable to a theoretical unknown key-share (UKS) attack [ 5 ]: a malicious client B, with the help of another client E, can induce a client A to believe that she (still) shares a secret key with E, and instead A shares the key with B. The practical exploitability of this attack in actual implementations is still to be investigated. Our formalization covers also the behaviour of the users, when relevant; e.g., if the users do not check the fingerprints of their shared keys, a MitM attack is possible.
lxgr 2y ago
> the decryption keys are stored on multiple servers in multiple jurisdictions Which is completely besides the point when the question is "should you trust Telegram", given that they are still entirely under Telegram's logical control. The only circumstance under which this is a meaningful difference is when somebody other than Telegram (law enforcement with a warrant, law enforcement without a warrant, criminals etc.) walks into a data center and pulls those servers' hard disks.

kgeist 2y ago

>Telegram is mostly about big group chats and channels where people share information with their fans. This is the gist of it. Telegram is mostly like an uncensored blog platform at this point. Probably the only platform to host official channels of Navalny, Zelenski, Dmitry Medvedev, Russian and Ukrainian milbloggers at the same time. And for public channels, E2E is pointless - everyone can see it anyway.

attendant3446 2y ago
And that's great. But Telegram promotes itself as a secure messenger. And that's a big lie. If they would advertise themselves as a WeChat / Line for the West, nobody would question it.
- diggan 2y ago
  > And that's great. But Telegram promotes itself as a secure messenger. And that's a big lie. But until someone actually published any hard evidence demonstrating weaknesses (ideally with a PoC), do we have anything else to go by? I wouldn't say I know for sure Telegram is 100% secure against government interception, but I also wouldn't claim the opposite, because neither ends/claims have been demonstrated and proven in a verifiably way.
  - fsflover 2y ago
    > But until someone actually published any hard evidence demonstrating weaknesses (ideally with a PoC), do we have anything else to go by? Here you go: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350809 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41350809
    - diggan 2y ago
      How does that prove that Telegram as a whole is not secure? The only thing that would demonstrate is that your normal, not-E2E encrypted, messages aren't E2E encrypted, which yeah, of course they aren't. I think you might confuse what the mud puddle test aims to demonstrate. It's to be able to confirm E2E encryption, which if you do that test with Telegram + Secret Chats (which is the E2E encryption feature in Telegram), you'll see you cannot recover those messages.

upofadown 2y ago

An encrypted system can depend on a trusted third party. Sometimes that trust is mandatory, like, say, a XMPP system used in an industry where IM messages have to be archived for future possible access to a regulator. Such systems are much easier for the user to use securely. Most end to end capable systems degrade to trusting the provider when the user fails to verify the identity of their correspondent using some ridiculously long number. In other words, the user has to take an assertive action to become fully end to end where only the end users are trusted. Just like with Telegram secret chats. You can't just claim that such systems are not encrypted. Things are more subtle. The headline here ("Telegram Is Not Encrypted") is misleading...

lxgr 2y ago
> The headline here ("Telegram Is Not Encrypted") is misleading... To an audience of laypersons, it's definitely much more accurate than saying "Telegram is encrypted". Maybe a better way of phrasing it would be "Telegram can read your messages if they choose to, or if anybody is able to force them".
- worik 2y ago
  > "Telegram can read your messages if they choose to, or if anybody is able to force them". Exactly. I.e: Telegram is not encrypted.

nostalgk 2y ago

I once visited Moscow for a AI coding jam sponsored by the Russian state, and while I was there, there was a Telegram group for all of the students to use to communicate during the jam. This Telegram channel was set up by the state officials. A small section of Russian students were floored, and responded that they thought Telegram was banned in the country at the time (circa 2017-2018). The state officials laughed and responded that it wasn't any concern because they could read everything in any chat they wanted. I've avoided the app ever since. I can't say how, why, or when the app became compromised, but anecdotally, I was told that it was and that it was no longer a concern in Russia. Maybe it was some dry joke, maybe those students were woefully misinformed, who knows. But it certainly broke any confidence I had in the security of any existing messaging app. I personally use Signal, but that's mostly just because I have personal friends who use it and it's convenient to use on my PC. Edit: Kinda funny, I only just logged into this site again, and some of my last previous comments were about the same thing.

Zamicol 2y ago
Signal's larger problem is the lack of a web client. Telegram (like everyone else) has a great, responsive web client. What's even more frustrating is that Signals desktop app is just an electron app, meaning it's generally designed for the browser.
- siva7 2y ago
  Signals problem is they are too extreme on the security aspect neglecting everything else but a messaging app is much more than one feature to be considered a serious alternative for the masses. It hasn't even solved backup of your chats as a basic feature because it's not important to their developers but a non-negotiable feature for the majority of chat app users.
  - shric 2y ago
    Strange, I've been using Signal for years and its backup feature works just fine: 1. Enable backups. 2. Point it at a folder on your phone which gets synchronized somewhere 3. Note the 30 digit passphrase in your password manager. https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba... Have had no issue restoring to replacement phones.

FpUser 2y ago

>"sperm-obsessed co-founder of Telegram" >"possible vector for child sex abuse material" >"hub for various scams and crimes—but" What is it? Setting up a mood to make sure people feel that Durov / Telegram are bad? This is anything but even a try to objective journalism. Whoever the author is - fuck you.

cholantesh 2y ago
It's a tech blog, not that 'objective journalism' exists anyway.
- FpUser 2y ago
  That is why I said "try to objective journalism". We are all biased to a various degrees. But this particular one feels like puke. Does not matter if it is tech blog.
  - cholantesh 2y ago
    Firstly, a blog is an opinion piece, so that you went in expecting 'objective journalism' is quixotic. Secondly, even if it weren't opinion, journalism does not aspire to objectivity to begin with.
    - FpUser 2y ago
      >"Firstly, a blog is an opinion piece" Well, let me rephrase it then. I respect author's right to express the opinion. Still "fuck said opinion". It reeks.
kome 2y ago
that's absolutely shameful

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago

I wonder if developers of Tor or Matrix, which are far more popular among shady dealers as a percentage of regular users, were arrested. A storm would follow. In Durov's case - crickets. No EFF for you.

mr_mitm 2y ago
If those developers offer a platform while simultaneously not sufficiently moderating activities, then probably.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
  Sure they offer a platform. And they moderate nothing.
rsynnott 2y ago
Those are _actually_ e2e encrypted, so cannot moderate. Which is a much better defence than "well, we vaguely imply that our thing is e2e encrypted, but it's not, but also we don't moderate anyway".

d0mine 2y ago

The encryption is a red herring to distract from the truth: telegram is the only platform where views different from war profiteers can be expressed. You can't do it anywhere else: not on cnn, not bbc, not guardian, not bloomberg, ..., not fox news, not npr, not reddit, not medium, not in a french court that rubberstamps whatever overseas masters tell them.

qsdf38100 2y ago
What about Twitter ?
- d0mine 2y ago
  If you are a nobody, you can shout any nonsense there. It is an outrage machine: very useful for "divide & conquer" type of governance
lxgr 2y ago
If Telegram only wanted to be a "free-speech maximalist-like" platform, they could have simply skipped all of the misinformation around also being a "secure and encrypted" instant messenger. The fact that they did all of that is precisely the reason why you'll find so many cryptographers and privacy advocates being very critical of it.
worik 2y ago
> telegram is the only platform where views different from war profiteers can be expressed That is a strong, wrong, statement For one thing, although I have my quibbles about the standard of journalism at The Guardian, I do not think for a micro second they are beholden to "war profiteers".
squidbeak 2y ago
Opposing Russia's belligerence and atrocities in Ukraine doesn't make you a war profiteer. Telegram footage from Russian channels has actually been key to understanding how obscenely common those outrages are.

Beijinger 2y ago

I have no idea if it is encrypted or not. Always thought it is. But I think of offering a commercial service of something my buddy is currently offering for free on a smaller scale. And there have been police inquiries. I am US based and have a US passport. I wonder if I would have to respond to police inquiries. When is this enough, and when would I need a court order? And do I have to respond to foreign police inquiries. Demand a court order? And accept one from France, what is next? Russia? China? North Korea? I think in the end it was his French Passport that killed him. Now there are not so many options for him: He can help with providing a kind of key, backdoor whatever and can walk or gets a small sentence. I thought Telegram is encrypted and if done, in the right way, he could not provide help at all, but this seems not the case. The other option is that he asks for help from Russia. I am sure Putin could get him out in 1-2 years. Trust me, Putin has his ways with this, see Vadim Krasikov. :-) Let's hope he plays his cards wisely. Good luck.

wkat4242 2y ago

Yeah I kinda wonder why they don't end to end encrypt telegram, this would take them out of a lot of hot water with the authorities. Because the situation would be the same as with Signal and WhatsApp: What they can't see they can't moderate. Of course telegram is actually encrypted, but just not end to end. Except the secret chat function which is very limited (only works between 2 participants, only between 2 devices and everyone needs to be online at the same time for the key exchange to work).

skeledrew 2y ago
E2ee would break the convenience of instantly searching across 100s of conversations with potentially millions of messages, something I and millions of other users take advantage of everyday.
- wkat4242 2y ago
  Not necessarily. There are techniques to search encrypted data on a server without having said server know what it's actually searching for: https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~dawnsong/papers/se.pdf https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~dawnsong/papers/se.pdf You could also maintain an index locally.
  - skeledrew 2y ago
    Yes there are PoC techniques out there. How do they stand up in practical circumstances though? Who's using any of these techniques at scale and what's the UX like? Something that's very nice about TG search is that it stems the terms, so if for example I search for "deleted", I also get results containing "deletes" and "delete". There is also search by username and by date. How would those be affected? Why would I want to maintain a local index? How much of my compute and storage will it take? How well will it work across all my devices and clients (I have 3 clients just on my phone)? I personally am a part of over 700 conversions, some having millions of messages, and many of which I rarely interact with, but when I do, I know I have easy, instant access. It sounds highly inconvenient that I should have to constantly maintain any of that for the few times I may want to dive in to check on something and get out again. Might as well those conversations never existed in the first place. And of course these considerations aren't just for me, but the nearly 1 billion users of the platform.

cryptonector 2y ago

That's funny because the French government is accusing him of: - Fourniture de prestations de cryptologie visant à assurer des fonctions de confidentialité sans déclaration conforme, Providing cryptography services with an eye to ensure confidentiality features without a compliance declaration. (Translation mine.) - Fourniture d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable, Providing a cryptographic method non-exclusively ensuring authentication and integrity features w/o prior declaration. (Translation mine.) - Importation d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable. Same, but regarding import controls. The first item implies that you're not allowed to provide others with software/services that provides confidentiality protection without registration -- without a statement that you comply with legal requirements! Presumably the compliance declaration is subject to prosecution for perjury or similar charges if they can twist the legal requirements after your registration. The second item implies that you're not allowed to provide others even with something as innocuous as authentication and integrity protection software/services without first registering your intent to do so!! In the context of the cryptowars of the 90s, and in the context of web browsers, all of this is just pure nonsense. Where are the prosecutions of Mozilla, Google, and Apple (and Brave, and Opera, and...) for distributing browsers which all provide confidentiality services? Or did they all get approval from the French government?

lxgr 2y ago
It's worth noting that the US still has such a law on the books as well apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th... > Or did they all get approval from the French government? Presumably, since it seems to largely be a formality at this point. I'm also very disappointed to see it being used in this case, since otherwise nothing in these charges is about cryptography.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  Export controls on crypto are one thing, and easily avoided by using open source (since there is an exemption for open source). But import controls are much more obnoxious and harder to deal with.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

saos 2y ago

That’s my fustration with Telegram. When it comes to ui/ux is beats WhatsApp day and night. But the encryption by default is so so disappointing

mrkramer 2y ago

I never trusted Telegram; who are their founders, what is their corporate structure and management style, what are their values and vision? Nor do I trust any other centralized messaging app. P2P FTW. Cryptography is the only salvation.

kkfx 2y ago

Just a small note: even if Telegram would be encrypted end to end, most people use it with a mobile app, writing messages with the OS virtual keyboard, inserting images/video from the OS internal storage. How can anyone think an app could be private on a closed source, remotely managed, OS it run on it's definitively not? How can anyone think a damn picture on an Android/iOS/* phone could be considered private? People have Google Photos/iCloud auto-backups and do care about "the privacy of a messaging app"? Beside that I do consider this arrests much less meaningful than most current press, yes it's a debatable act, but so far Telegram works in France, there is no state-enforced block, in user base size terms it's hardly be considered a significant hostile political/social actor, and actually the government is doing MUCH bigger things against the République and Democracy at a whole than arresting the funder of a messaging services based in Dubai...

rsynnott 2y ago
I mean, I assume people who are seriously concerned with privacy to a sufficient extent don't turn on those auto backups (though at least the Apple one _does_ have an e2e encryption option).

stiltzkin 2y ago

[dead]

_imnothere 2y ago

Wrong title. Not Encrypted (x) Not "Fully" Encrypted (o)