6 ms·

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 ca

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?
        darkhorn 12y ago
        So Turkey or Bulgaria will ask for data, Twlegram will give it, and these governments will say to shut up or we will fly to arrest you in whatever country you live and kick you into jail and we will get your money out of the banks, doesn't matter in what country it is. Seems possible like if you give a million dollar. Not impossible, as far as you give such money. But the countries I have mentioned are not that rich. Also if you look at the forums about justice and advocates etc you can see that Microsoft provides user data but not Google or Facebook (except very big and obvious crimes). But Microsoft, oh it is like your best enemy. So my point is that you will hear it (except spying) if it is a legal request.
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    Yes.
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]

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?
      - darkhorn 12y ago
        So Turkey or Bulgaria will ask for data, Twlegram will give it, and these governments will say to shut up or we will fly to arrest you in whatever country you live and kick you into jail and we will get your money out of the banks, doesn't matter in what country it is. Seems possible like if you give a million dollar. Not impossible, as far as you give such money. But the countries I have mentioned are not that rich. Also if you look at the forums about justice and advocates etc you can see that Microsoft provides user data but not Google or Facebook (except very big and obvious crimes). But Microsoft, oh it is like your best enemy. So my point is that you will hear it (except spying) if it is a legal request.
- Karunamon 12y ago
  Yes.

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.