maqp

46 ms·

511.
by maqp 6y ago
"So while Signal's servers can see who to deliver the message to they cannot see who sent it." Why can't they look at the TCP headers of incoming packets to determine source-IP? Also, why can't they look at session
512.
by maqp 6y ago
Indeed, the PIN is just for SVR. Exported message logs on Android use separate, client-generated, 30-digit, PINs. Unless the OS+HW provide API for some sort of TPM, it's not possible to provide strong protection for app databases witho
513.
by maqp 6y ago
(DH-ratchet is still there. 1536-bit FF-DH was replaced with X3DH etc, but the basic idea is still there. Adding hash ratchet for non-round-trip messaging was a good idea, as was pre-keys stored on server. IMO it's fair to say it'
514.
by maqp 6y ago
The thing is, there's nothing to audit. The world's best audit of Telegram would make the following obvious findings: 1. It's not E2EE by default therefore it's not private and secure by default. 2. It's not E2EE at
515.
by maqp 6y ago
The very fact out-of-date security mechanisms passed into first version should tell the developers don't follow their field, or that they're complete amateurs. Both are flags so red Stalin would have a problem with it.
516.
by maqp 6y ago
It can, but given Telegram's history and professional cryptographers like Schneier[1] and Green[2] saying DO NOT USE IT, it's obvious it's _anything_ but watertight. [1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/arch
517.
by maqp 6y ago
This. It's not the Durov brothers who are moving the field of secure messaging onwards, or talking at conferences. They're complete amateurs surrounded by fanboys who don't understand the very basics of the field, and who thi
518.
by maqp 6y ago
The protocol and all Telegram is open source. The open source Telegram client tells us 1. That E2EE is not enabled by default 2. That E2EE is not available at all for group chats 3. That E2EE is not available at all for desktop clients. So
519.
by maqp 6y ago
Nobody's claimed that. Open source is not panacea for verifiable security, it is however a requirement of it.
520.
by maqp 6y ago
"Are we sure it can't?" No, there's a 1..2% chance of backdoor. The real question is, why is Telegram more secure? There's a 100% chance it can read your group messages, because it says so on their documentation tha
521.
by maqp 6y ago
"Can we stop using 6-year-old info for apps that get updated monthly?" The fact Telegram's E2EE has not been available 1. by default 2. on desktop apps 3. for group messages for seven years tells you exactly how secure it is.
522.
by maqp 6y ago
Explain how this works. A blue party voter writes to another blue party voter: Hey, let's vote blue this year. NSA that intercepts the message and __________.
523.
by maqp 6y ago
There's also stuff like ISIS communication and CP in Telegram, so the disgusting stuff is where people are at, no matter what.
524.
by maqp 6y ago
This is not true at all. It's already available. https://cwtch.im/ https://briarproject.org/ https://ricochet.im/ https://github.com/maqp/tfc
525.
by maqp 6y ago
That must be a generational/geolocational thing. I've never even heard either of them was available in the app.
526.
by maqp 6y ago
The group will leak member roles like the Owner however, so the black bag group will know who(se device) they should compromise next.
527.
by maqp 6y ago
Oh yeah that feature which conveniently deletes your "Down with the <dictator name goes here>" group and its member list every 60 minutes and forces users to create a new one.
528.
by maqp 6y ago
Wireshark would show group messages in Telegram are indeed encrypted. However, they are encrypted only in-transit, meaning the server will see 100% of group chats. This can not be trivially detected with wireshark hence the advice to use th
529.
by maqp 6y ago
"people saying otherwise don't use Telegram, and/or do not know what they are arguing over" So that would include world famous professional cryptographers like Bruce Schneier and Matt Green. Meanwhile the people recommen
530.
by maqp 6y ago
" I don't understand how they will get the chats except from individual phones. " ~~By default~~ Telegram's group chats used to organize protests aren't E2EE. If Belarusian government hacks Telegram server, they can
531.
by maqp 6y ago
"they go to great lengths to prevent that information from becoming available." Where's the documentation for this? Without documentation your assumption that there's any security is just blind faith.
532.
by maqp 6y ago
Facebook's Messenger app is TLS-encrypted (i.e. encryption happens between client and server) unless special E2EE mode with Signal protocol is enabled. Telegram is encrypted with client-server MTProto (i.e. encryption ALSO happens betw
533.
by maqp 6y ago
" It’s no more unsafe as using whatsapp or some other similar service. " There's perhaps a 1-2% chance WhatsApp has a backdoor that allows server to read all group conversations at will. There's 100% chance Telegram&#x27
534.
by maqp 6y ago
When you realize end-to-end encryption is a necessary property of all features, you realize Telegram lacks even basic things like desktop clients, syncable chats, and group chats. Not so feature rich anymore ;)
535.
by maqp 6y ago
" And nope, Signal doesn't make the cut for the above reasons because it exposes your phone number to everyone else " This is being worked on. The thing is you're mixing two threat models. One is a creepy dude who will g
536.
by maqp 6y ago
"Poll shows that 1,184 million choose to vote for new president Tikhanovskaya." It is possible that Telegram is being impartial and providing more honest statistics wrt. what the citizens want. But it's also the case the resu
537.
by maqp 6y ago
Key exchange algorithm, symmetric cipher and mode of operation, is it forward secret, future secret, how are keys generated (CSPRNG algorithm), how are the ciphers tested (test vectors, links to test vector sources and to unittests doing te
538.
by maqp 6y ago
What's the issue with self-hosting? It's not that expensive to run a netbook 24/7 with an Onion Service. I'm doing that for my FreedomBox with radicale etc. ATM. There's no overhead costs like static IP or hostname.
539.
by maqp 6y ago
So if an ignorant/malicious user creates a room without E2EE and doesn't care to enable it even when requested, all users are forced to converse in effectively plaintext, and the solution is "clients tell users it's not
540.
by maqp 6y ago
Oh, TIL. I'm still unable to find the information from the white paper that was promised to be there.

More ›