4 ms·
Yes. The contest is not about actually exposing flaws in their cryptosystem, which is why the rules are rigged up in a way that would allow even a terribly inse
by hdevalence 13y ago
Yes. The contest is not about actually exposing flaws in their cryptosystem, which is why the rules are rigged up in a way that would allow even a terribly insecure protocol (like Telegram's, or Moxie's counter-challenge protocol) to pass as "secure".
- h0cked 13y agoTelegram's contest itself is meaningless regarding the security of its protocol (as others explained in details). Finding bugs such as this deserves 200k more than anything else
- ballard 13y agoOffering the contest was shady and stupid enough. Not paying just proves they're chiselers that never intended to pay in the first place. This wins the runner-up award for second most botched PR disaster ever. The consolation prize is a lump of coal.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- phaus 13y agoThe contest was stupid and shady, but they did explicitly state the rules. Its not really fair to accuse them of wrongdoing if they don't give this guy $200,000. If I were in charge of telegram, I'd pay the guy the whole amount, but that would just be out of the kindness of my heart. Morally, they aren't obligated to pay just because the rules of their contest are ridiculous.
- danabramov 13y agoThey're paying $100 000. https://vk.com/wall-52630202_7858 https://vk.com/wall-52630202_7858
- ballard 13y agoIt's too late to matter. But good for him that they're only half crooked.