It also would have had much worse usability in the most common case: when government agencies aren't a real risk factor, but you want conversations synced between different apps.
Seriously, disregarding trade-off between security and usability is exactly how we ended up with very secure, 20-digit passwords, containing every possible unicode symbol, updated every Monday, written on post-it notes hanging on the wall.
Not 100% relevant to the article, but if anyone hasn't already given it a try - Signal is a great cross-platform messaging service. I don't understand why more people aren't using it
Similar to another discussion I'm on in this same thread, Signal is simply non viable for my use case at this time. I have the app on my iPhone but I have no conversations in it. For background, my primary IM service is Facebook Messenger, followed by Telegram for some chats, followed by Discord for larger groups around games.
Signal doesn't have a native (or even near-native) desktop app for macOS and Windows nor does it support my iPad. For an app I rely on as much as my messaging software it must be available and high quality on every platform I commonly use. Signal's desktop app is poor compared to the extremely polished Telegram macOS app and the nearly as well made Telegram Windows/Linux/macOS app. Admittedly Messenger doesn't have a very good Windows app but in my opinion it is still better than Signal's, while it completely lacks a macOS app which is a bummer.
The Signal iOS app has no way for me to back up my messages, and I understand they are not backed up on Signal's servers. This means if I lose my phone I will lose all my messages. On IM services such as Facebook Messenger and Telegram this is a non-issue for non-E2E chats. I realize this is considered a feature for many, but for me it is a strong anti-feature.
And finally yet most importantly - practically no one I know uses Signal. Even the 5 or 6 contacts it found haven't even set profile photos nor did they reply to a test message I sent - it's likely they've uninstalled it from their phone. Everyone I routinely interact with save maybe two people are on Facebook Messenger or at least visit Facebook.com eventually.
I just convinced my political discussion Whatsapp group to move to Signal. The client is not as polished, but works well, and we feel more comfortable sharing political opinions. I'd say it was worth the hassle.
My friends used to use Signal, but we were put off by needing real phone numbers, as well as some persistent errors in the app (communication-breaking ones).
Personally, I'm rather unhappy that Signal isn't federated, and they don't allow third-party apps to use their server.
Finally, the Signal app isn't compatible with my phone. Conversations (XMPP+OMEMO) and older versions of Riot.im (MAtrix) are available to me.
Signal is outstanding. I've convinced a few dozen friends and coworkers to migrate over, I'm a member of several group chats, and everything works great. There were a few issues last year with group chats and keys breaking pretty badly, but everything's been a lot more polished (and idiot-resistant) since the last major overhaul a few months ago.
Signal is awesome. If know several people who work for a very large company that has their own chat/message system that actually use Signal instead — specifically for security reasons.
It is makes me smile. I never heard any news that Signal has been done anything or it were used by anybody. But in every Telegram article there is 100% chance that somebody will come with advertisement about Signal.
This highlights the problem. Why should they have any keys? It should be end to end encryption, where users have the keys. Otherwise it's already insecure and no one should be using it. Government demanding something is just a symptom.
This has been the chief complaint about Telegram, and the entire reason I've never even tried using it. As long as you're trusting the corp with your keys, you're just as secure as any other site that provides chat over HTTPS.
Telegram has publicly stated that they refuse to hand over their keys (though whether or not they will, time will tell). This is in contrast to FB, Google, and Twitter who have not released a statement about whether or not they will comply: http://www.zdnet.com/article/facebook-twitter-google-censors...
Remember in 2013 when Lavabit said their email was so secure that even their sysadmins can't read it? And then, after the secret US government subpoena was made public it turned out that Lavabit's claim of "can't" was more like "won't".
Better to not have to trust the intentions (or ability to resist torture, etc) of Telegram, Pavel Durov, et al. Better to have end-to-end encryption by default, like in Signal.
There has never been such a thing as end to end encryption on a cell phone. Carrier "debugging" tools such as CarierIQ hook at a lower level and can intercept and log everything that any application can see. CarrierIQ was acquired by AT&T and doesn't even officially have a name any more. They would tell you it only runs if the phone is in debug mode, but the dial home to the carrier can enable it via a simple header.
Perhaps the difference here is that Russia does not have access to this data?
This distorts the usual meaning of end-to-end encryption, which is that data over the wire is encrypted and can't be MITMed, even by the "service provider" (Telegram in this case).
You are bringing up a good but different point, which is that the application environment on a mobile device may not be protecting you from certain privacy violations. I'm no fan of Telegram, but that's not really within their control.
Put another way, if unbeknownst to Telegram someone had installed a keylogger on my device, would you consider that to be broken end-to-end encryption?
Could you please provide some home-reading material on the topic? I understand that the notion of "secure messenger" linked to your phone number and running on a phone is laughable, but it's the first time I hear accusations that my mobile operator can retrieve basically any info from my phone, like actually right now, without breaking a sweat.
Does it apply to all mobile operators or only to american ones?
I don't understand how Android phones in the US can be backdoor-free considering it's the carriers that provide the final update to devices and they are the ones to sign it. Would the OEMs know if the carriers included a backdoor in there on NSA's behalf? Probably not.
If FSB really wants access - and sooner or later they will, as Telegram keeps growing... As long as Telegram founders still have family inside Russia, they are vulnerable
You see Russia is in a unique position. They want to fight dissent online, they have a very competitive ISP market with lots and lots of ISPs that are hard to control, they have a lot of foreign companies taking a huge share of internet usage, they alienated IT professionals and don't really have smart loyal people who can help them figure these things out. So they seek guidance in China and follow Chinese ideas to monitor and filter online communications. Meaning that they are trying to figure out how to pressure foreign companies like Telegram to cooperate, how to pressure ISPs to cooperate, how to block access to the services foreign companies provide, given how many different ISPs there are. So at this point it's more like a process, not an actual end goal of getting access to this one particular platform. And family is definitely not the line they would want to cross, as it would undermine the whole process if the word gets out.
Telegram as usually refuses to give encryption keys to anyone.
While there seems to be a lot to say about Telegram crypto at least their priorities seems to be aligned with mine unlike WhatsApp that is owned by Facebook.
WhatsApp is NOT any different. They may have Signal's encryption algo, but they still store effectively unencrypted messages in their servers. Because that is the only way to sync between devices when adding a new device. And also the only way for FB to data mine.
This is not the only way to sync encrypted messages between devices with different keys. Matrix and XMPP+MAM+OMEMO both allow for message synchronization between devices, while having different keys on each device.
[+] [-] yoavm|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tandav|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] avodonosov|8 years ago|reply
https://telegram.org/faq#secret-chats
[+] [-] golergka|8 years ago|reply
Seriously, disregarding trade-off between security and usability is exactly how we ended up with very secure, 20-digit passwords, containing every possible unicode symbol, updated every Monday, written on post-it notes hanging on the wall.
[+] [-] handbanana|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jakebasile|8 years ago|reply
Signal doesn't have a native (or even near-native) desktop app for macOS and Windows nor does it support my iPad. For an app I rely on as much as my messaging software it must be available and high quality on every platform I commonly use. Signal's desktop app is poor compared to the extremely polished Telegram macOS app and the nearly as well made Telegram Windows/Linux/macOS app. Admittedly Messenger doesn't have a very good Windows app but in my opinion it is still better than Signal's, while it completely lacks a macOS app which is a bummer.
The Signal iOS app has no way for me to back up my messages, and I understand they are not backed up on Signal's servers. This means if I lose my phone I will lose all my messages. On IM services such as Facebook Messenger and Telegram this is a non-issue for non-E2E chats. I realize this is considered a feature for many, but for me it is a strong anti-feature.
And finally yet most importantly - practically no one I know uses Signal. Even the 5 or 6 contacts it found haven't even set profile photos nor did they reply to a test message I sent - it's likely they've uninstalled it from their phone. Everyone I routinely interact with save maybe two people are on Facebook Messenger or at least visit Facebook.com eventually.
edit: grammar and expanded responses
[+] [-] carlesfe|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] avhon1|8 years ago|reply
Personally, I'm rather unhappy that Signal isn't federated, and they don't allow third-party apps to use their server.
Finally, the Signal app isn't compatible with my phone. Conversations (XMPP+OMEMO) and older versions of Riot.im (MAtrix) are available to me.
[+] [-] parliament32|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] detaro|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pimeys|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] briandear|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andreagrandi|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cvaidya1986|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xenator|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] phyzome|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ahelwer|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shmerl|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] parliament32|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Karrot_Kream|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aorth|8 years ago|reply
Better to not have to trust the intentions (or ability to resist torture, etc) of Telegram, Pavel Durov, et al. Better to have end-to-end encryption by default, like in Signal.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131002/17443624734/lavab...
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] praneshp|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LinuxBender|8 years ago|reply
Perhaps the difference here is that Russia does not have access to this data?
[+] [-] stanleydrew|8 years ago|reply
You are bringing up a good but different point, which is that the application environment on a mobile device may not be protecting you from certain privacy violations. I'm no fan of Telegram, but that's not really within their control.
Put another way, if unbeknownst to Telegram someone had installed a keylogger on my device, would you consider that to be broken end-to-end encryption?
[+] [-] krick|8 years ago|reply
Does it apply to all mobile operators or only to american ones?
[+] [-] mtgx|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dharma1|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zzzcpan|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] prawn|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gmemstr|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trisimix|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] coolspot|8 years ago|reply
Do they cooperate?
[+] [-] gagabity|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] varjag|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xenator|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eitland|8 years ago|reply
Telegram as usually refuses to give encryption keys to anyone.
While there seems to be a lot to say about Telegram crypto at least their priorities seems to be aligned with mine unlike WhatsApp that is owned by Facebook.
[+] [-] ChristianBundy|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Justsignedup|8 years ago|reply
WhatsApp is NOT any different. They may have Signal's encryption algo, but they still store effectively unencrypted messages in their servers. Because that is the only way to sync between devices when adding a new device. And also the only way for FB to data mine.
So... Yeah bad reporting.
[+] [-] bjoli|8 years ago|reply
They store undelivered, encrypted messages on the server.
[+] [-] avhon1|8 years ago|reply