4 ms·

its not done server side

by utnick 13y ago

6d0debc071 13y ago
Eh, yes and no. It's not sent in plain text to the server. However, in the sense that it's 'Lavabit all over again', or at least a procedure that produces isomorphic problems, the encryption seems to be being done server-side: -------------------------- 'The difference between messages in Secret Chats and ordinary Telegram messages is in the encryption type: client-client in case of Secret Chats, client-server/server-client for ordinary chats. This enables your ordinary Telegram messages to be both secure and available in the cloud so that you can access them from any of your devices — which is very useful at times.' https://telegram.org/faq#q-why-not-just-make-all-chats-secret https://telegram.org/faq#q-why-not-just-make-all-chats-secre... -------------------------- I have trouble construing that other than in you use the server's key to encrypt the message you send and then server encrypts it with the public key associated with the addressees' device at the time. ... This seems to produce the same problem LB had in that you can be asked to turn over the keys to the messages on your server. And for similar reasons, you're doing encryption on your server. # Given that LB had that trouble, I also have difficulty seeing any non-malicious reason for solving the key distribution problem this way. Since you can set up secret chats that are end to end encrypted you could equally have asked the client's devices to exchange a private key using each others' public keys. I'm tempted to explain it away in terms of the user being expected not to be technically savy enough to press the buttons on both devices when asked to do so. - But the client knowing about and using encryption in the first place implies at least some sort of technical competence which I would imagine is great enough to press two buttons when a prompt comes up saying something like: 'The device DEVICE NAME is asking for the key to read your messages. If you did not try to set up your mail on another device within the last minute, press the REPORT ATTACK button. Else press the ALLOW button.' Still, I've overestimated the average intelligence of people before.

its not done server side

by utnick 13y ago

its not done server side

Eh, yes and no. It's not sent in plain text to the server. However, in the sense that it's 'Lavabit all over again', or at least a procedure that produces isomorphic problems, the encryption seems to be being done server-side: -------------------------- 'The difference between messages in Secret Chats and ordinary Telegram messages is in the encryption type: client-client in case of Secret Chats, client-server/server-client for ordinary chats. This enables your ordinary Telegram messages to be both secure and available in the cloud so that you can access them from any of your devices — which is very useful at times.' https://telegram.org/faq#q-why-not-just-make-all-chats-secret https://telegram.org/faq#q-why-not-just-make-all-chats-secre... -------------------------- I have trouble construing that other than in you use the server's key to encrypt the message you send and then server encrypts it with the public key associated with the addressees' device at the time. ... This seems to produce the same problem LB had in that you can be asked to turn over the keys to the messages on your server. And for similar reasons, you're doing encryption on your server. # Given that LB had that trouble, I also have difficulty seeing any non-malicious reason for solving the key distribution problem this way. Since you can set up secret chats that are end to end encrypted you could equally have asked the client's devices to exchange a private key using each others' public keys. I'm tempted to explain it away in terms of the user being expected not to be technically savy enough to press the buttons on both devices when asked to do so. - But the client knowing about and using encryption in the first place implies at least some sort of technical competence which I would imagine is great enough to press two buttons when a prompt comes up saying something like: 'The device DEVICE NAME is asking for the key to read your messages. If you did not try to set up your mail on another device within the last minute, press the REPORT ATTACK button. Else press the ALLOW button.' Still, I've overestimated the average intelligence of people before.