4 ms·
Is this the same messengering app that had the whole encryption debacle a month or two ago?
by Oculus 13y ago
Is this the same messengering app that had the whole encryption debacle a month or two ago?
- jessepollak 13y agoYes. They Show HN'd to much controversy [1]. Started a $200,000 'crypto challenge' [2] which lots of people hated on [3]. Then someone compromised their protocol and they gave away $100,000 [4]. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6913456 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6913456 [2] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6931457 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6931457 [3] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6936539 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6936539 [4] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742 EDIT: /launched/Show HN/s
- huhtenberg 13y ago> They launched to ... They "launched" several months before their appearance on HN. Though I guess it doesn't really qualify as a true launch without a "Show HN" thread, right?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- darklajid 13y agoTo be fair: If we're talking 'replace WhatsApp', the 'had security issues' point is - well - comparable. Competitive? :) I stay with xmpp.
- lucb1e 13y agoConsidering that WhatsApp used port 443 but sent messages in plaintext... I think Telegram actually did better. Also since in the end, nobody actually turned out to be able to decrypt messages.
- MichaelGG 13y agoWhatsApp didn't go on about their security and mock security expert's opinions, either. Telegram intentionally built their own encryption, did a poor job, summarily dismissed expert criticism, and set up a shame contest. That kind of behaviour is far worse than an "SMS-replacement" service not really putting much effort into security.
- im3w1l 13y agoFrom what I remember they were arrogant in the beginning, but in the end they admitted their flaws and fixed them?