6 ms·

There's been a lot of controversy over the Telegram encryption protocol. Any cryptographer that looks at it cringes, but Telegram has deep pockets and has done

by moxie 12y ago

There's been a lot of controversy over the Telegram encryption protocol. Any cryptographer that looks at it cringes, but Telegram has deep pockets and has done a decent job building hype. Beyond doubts with the protocol itself, I think the more important consideration is that most people never use it. Telegram is not encrypted by default. Users have to create a special "secret chat" with contacts that is ephemeral, and some Telegram clients don't even support that mode. Last I checked, there was no way to have group "secret chats" in any client at all. The result is a situation where many users seem to think that Telegram is somehow secure by default, when it definitely isn't. Telegram even stores plaintext copies of everyone's entire message history on the server for multi-device sync. I think what Telegram is doing right now is dangerous, and potentially another Lavabit in the making. I'd like to see them incorporate a modern end to end encryption protocol, and enable it by default. To be transparent, I work on TextSecure and am involved with the WhatsApp end-to-end encryption project.

desireco42 12y ago
Thank you for bringing this up, I was under impression telegram would be secure by default.
- darkhorn 12y ago
  The communication with the server is encrypted, if you use the official apps. If you use secret chat they are not stored as plain text on the servers and you can make them auto destroy. Also you can delete your chat history. But it is better than WhatsApp because it is not part of governmental control.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - vertex-four 12y ago
    > it is not part of governmental control Isn't that a pretty dangerous assertion in itself? It's a private company running private servers that you have no control over and no ability to tell whether or not an external entity has accessed your data.
    - darkhorn 12y ago
      Whom should I be afraid of? A private company who or my government?
      - towelguy 12y ago
        > Whom should I be afraid of? My government possibly controlling a private company or my government? FTFY
        darkhorn 12y ago
        Not in my case. Neither Turkey nor Bulgaria has control over Telegram. Howaver these countries have good relatoins with Microsoft, you know we buy Windows you give user information stuff. That may happened to me in the past or not I don't want to mentoin it here but I have 0 tolerance to companies somehow related with Microsft like Facebook, WhatsApp, Skype etc.
      - vertex-four 12y ago
        Both, really - there's not really anything the Government can do that a large enough company or collection of companies can't - but the point is that you have no proof that this company is not either wilfully collaborating with or being forced to collaborate with the Government.
        darkhorn 12y ago
        Microsoft provides users' information to Turkey. Telegram haven't done something similar, yet.
        vertex-four 12y ago
        > Telegram haven't done something similar. As far as you know. Why would they publicise it if they did? How can you prove they've not been forced to?
        12y ago
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Totally bogus. TextSecure-enabled WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted using a widely-respected cryptographic messaging scheme. Telegram isn't. The point of serious end-to-end encryption is that it doesn't matter who runs the servers. TextSecure-enabled WhatsApp beats Telegram on a pure engineering level; we don't even need to reach politics to prefer it.
    - tonymon 12y ago
      But how you can be sure about that if WhatsApp code is not opensourced? Telegram has at least iOS and Android code opensourced.
      - sdevlin 12y ago
        Source code doesn't really matter as much as you'd think. In fact, it can be deceptive in some cases. I would call source code a nice-to-have. In contrast, observing the network traffic, debugging the application, and examining the decompiled binary will tell you exactly what's going on.
        electic 12y ago
        Telegram bashing aside, this is very wrong. It is always better to have the source code to inspect the entire package. Without the source code, there is no way to fully verify the security of a solution. For Telegram and WhatsApp, the clients and server code should be released if you want to make sure.
        smtddr 12y ago
        No, you're wrong. People can give you whatever source code they want. That doesn't meant it's the same as what's running in production. While this is tin-foil-hat paranoia, when it comes to encryption software in this post-snowden world it is definitely more reliable to reverse-engineer the binary & network traffic than to just believe the provided source-code to encryption in a popular social app. Or compile the app from source that has been verified by trusted people. Definitely not believing that a binary blob running on your hardware is the same as the provided source. That said, it's also good to ask for source code so later on when reverse-engineering shows something different you've now caught the offending party in a lie; which is something good to have on record to refer to later on.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
darkhorn 12y ago
Nice try NSA, nice try! I use Telegram, which is not related with country I live and the USA. Also I use Babel when I'm out of internet.
- tptacek 12y ago
  This kind of nonsense isn't making Telegram look any better.
- alex_sf 12y ago
  Do you realize who you're replying to?
  - darkhorn 12y ago
    Yes, to the/a guy who is developing a security application which works only with Android. But can you tell me how can you communicate over TextSecure when your friends are using iOS. Also how can you be so sure about your privacy when TextSecure is located/developed at the USA?http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_WhisperSystems http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_WhisperSystems
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - alex_sf 12y ago
      Yeah, no, you clearly don't know who you're replying to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxie_Marlinspike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxie_Marlinspike If there's one person that I would trust with my privacy, it's Moxie.
    - 01Michael10 12y ago
      Does anyone remember when Hacker News didn't have so many trolls? Gee, sorry TextSecure is not on your platform of choice yet... I can think of worse things then something being located/developed in the USA...
      - 12y ago
zeitg3ist 12y ago
> Telegram even stores plaintext copies of everyone's entire message history on the server for multi-device sync. Really? In their FAQ [1] they state: > ordinary chats use client-server/server-client encryption and are stored securely encrypted on our servers What's your source? [1] https://telegram.org/faq https://telegram.org/faq
- moxie 12y ago
  This is a great example of deceptive marketing at work. You can check out their API here: https://core.telegram.org/methods#working-with-messages https://core.telegram.org/methods#working-with-messages ...where's the encryption on message histories? There is none. If the data is encrypted server-side, it's with keys that live on the servers. In other words, the encryption provides no value and the servers are "trusted." The point of end to end encryption is not to have to trust servers.
  - jhasse 12y ago
    As stated in the FAQ normal chats are NOT end to end encrypted. Of course the server has to store the messages in plain text to make cloud sync work (without requiring a password).

by moxie 12y ago

desireco42 12y ago

Thank you for bringing this up, I was under impression telegram would be secure by default.

darkhorn 12y ago
The communication with the server is encrypted, if you use the official apps. If you use secret chat they are not stored as plain text on the servers and you can make them auto destroy. Also you can delete your chat history. But it is better than WhatsApp because it is not part of governmental control.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- vertex-four 12y ago
  > it is not part of governmental control Isn't that a pretty dangerous assertion in itself? It's a private company running private servers that you have no control over and no ability to tell whether or not an external entity has accessed your data.
  - darkhorn 12y ago
    Whom should I be afraid of? A private company who or my government?
    - towelguy 12y ago
      > Whom should I be afraid of? My government possibly controlling a private company or my government? FTFY
      - darkhorn 12y ago
        Not in my case. Neither Turkey nor Bulgaria has control over Telegram. Howaver these countries have good relatoins with Microsoft, you know we buy Windows you give user information stuff. That may happened to me in the past or not I don't want to mentoin it here but I have 0 tolerance to companies somehow related with Microsft like Facebook, WhatsApp, Skype etc.
    - vertex-four 12y ago
      Both, really - there's not really anything the Government can do that a large enough company or collection of companies can't - but the point is that you have no proof that this company is not either wilfully collaborating with or being forced to collaborate with the Government.
      - darkhorn 12y ago
        Microsoft provides users' information to Turkey. Telegram haven't done something similar, yet.
        vertex-four 12y ago
        > Telegram haven't done something similar. As far as you know. Why would they publicise it if they did? How can you prove they've not been forced to?
        12y ago
- tptacek 12y ago
  Totally bogus. TextSecure-enabled WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted using a widely-respected cryptographic messaging scheme. Telegram isn't. The point of serious end-to-end encryption is that it doesn't matter who runs the servers. TextSecure-enabled WhatsApp beats Telegram on a pure engineering level; we don't even need to reach politics to prefer it.
  - tonymon 12y ago
    But how you can be sure about that if WhatsApp code is not opensourced? Telegram has at least iOS and Android code opensourced.
    - sdevlin 12y ago
      Source code doesn't really matter as much as you'd think. In fact, it can be deceptive in some cases. I would call source code a nice-to-have. In contrast, observing the network traffic, debugging the application, and examining the decompiled binary will tell you exactly what's going on.
      - electic 12y ago
        Telegram bashing aside, this is very wrong. It is always better to have the source code to inspect the entire package. Without the source code, there is no way to fully verify the security of a solution. For Telegram and WhatsApp, the clients and server code should be released if you want to make sure.
        smtddr 12y ago
        No, you're wrong. People can give you whatever source code they want. That doesn't meant it's the same as what's running in production. While this is tin-foil-hat paranoia, when it comes to encryption software in this post-snowden world it is definitely more reliable to reverse-engineer the binary & network traffic than to just believe the provided source-code to encryption in a popular social app. Or compile the app from source that has been verified by trusted people. Definitely not believing that a binary blob running on your hardware is the same as the provided source. That said, it's also good to ask for source code so later on when reverse-engineering shows something different you've now caught the offending party in a lie; which is something good to have on record to refer to later on.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

darkhorn 12y ago

Nice try NSA, nice try! I use Telegram, which is not related with country I live and the USA. Also I use Babel when I'm out of internet.

tptacek 12y ago
This kind of nonsense isn't making Telegram look any better.
alex_sf 12y ago
Do you realize who you're replying to?
- darkhorn 12y ago
  Yes, to the/a guy who is developing a security application which works only with Android. But can you tell me how can you communicate over TextSecure when your friends are using iOS. Also how can you be so sure about your privacy when TextSecure is located/developed at the USA?http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_WhisperSystems http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_WhisperSystems
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - alex_sf 12y ago
    Yeah, no, you clearly don't know who you're replying to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxie_Marlinspike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxie_Marlinspike If there's one person that I would trust with my privacy, it's Moxie.
  - 01Michael10 12y ago
    Does anyone remember when Hacker News didn't have so many trolls? Gee, sorry TextSecure is not on your platform of choice yet... I can think of worse things then something being located/developed in the USA...
    - 12y ago

zeitg3ist 12y ago

> Telegram even stores plaintext copies of everyone's entire message history on the server for multi-device sync. Really? In their FAQ [1] they state: > ordinary chats use client-server/server-client encryption and are stored securely encrypted on our servers What's your source? [1] https://telegram.org/faq https://telegram.org/faq

moxie 12y ago
This is a great example of deceptive marketing at work. You can check out their API here: https://core.telegram.org/methods#working-with-messages https://core.telegram.org/methods#working-with-messages ...where's the encryption on message histories? There is none. If the data is encrypted server-side, it's with keys that live on the servers. In other words, the encryption provides no value and the servers are "trusted." The point of end to end encryption is not to have to trust servers.
- jhasse 12y ago
  As stated in the FAQ normal chats are NOT end to end encrypted. Of course the server has to store the messages in plain text to make cloud sync work (without requiring a password).