Telegram Hands U.S. Authorities Data on Thousands of Users
Telegram Hands U.S. Authorities Data on Thousands of Users
The number of data requests fulfilled by Telegram skyrocketed, with the company providing data to U.S. authorities on 2,253 users last year.
I know Lemmy hates telegram but it should be common knowledge that all platforms process requests from authorities.
The repeated posting of this story the last few days seems artificial.
I think the point is not that Telegram (the company) sucks, it is that Telegram (the app) sucks. A proper messenger like Signal leaves the provider with no information to hand over.
Many people still seem to be under the false impression that Telegram is private, so it's worth spreading around.
I don't really have any special hate for Telegram myself, and I never saw it as a secure communication platform. I have more problem with Signal because people treat it like it's paragon of privacy and security.
Many Signal alternatives also have security issues of their own, often making them less secure than Signal. This includes Matrix and XMPP. In the blog post regarding XMPP+OMEMO, the author replies to a question about which would be better than Signal, Matrix, and XMPP with this suggestion:
Anyone who cares about metadata resistance should look at Cwtch, Ricochet, or any other Tor-based solution. Not a mobile app. Not XMPP. Not Matrix.
In regards to Ricochet, not having a mobile app version makes it difficult to recommend to less tech savvy people.
And now you know why we've been telling you not to use Telegram.
What seems crazy to me is how many people they managed to convince that they were private when they most definitely are not.
I hear signal is not a good alternative. What is a good one, then?
https://lemmy.ml/comment/15999861
In the blog posts I read where the author, a security engineer, audited and/or reported vulnerabilities with two E2EE chat protocols commonly recommended as Signal alternatives--Matrix and XMPP--both had implemented half-baked solutions or refused to solve the issue at all in some regards, and both had evangelists that gave dismissive responses. The XMPP chud dev gave a laughably childish response, and the Matrix dev even admitted the team being aware of the olm vulnerability and deliberately refused to fix it for years. Not that Signal cultists are any better and not negating the legitimate security and trust issues with the Signal platform, but Signal is still a decent platform for most people's threat model, though it would be nice if there was an alternative that could compete with Signal to recommend to most people instead. If you care about metadata resistance and your threat model involves high stakes if your assets are compromised, the blog author suggests Tor-based solutions such as Cwtch and Ricochet Refresh.
This better not be a “computers received pentagon funding when the first Vaccum tubes were being made”.
Signal is an excellent choice. Literally forces cops to get a warrant for your phone and hope you didnt purge your messages after a few days.
If you want anonymity on top of that than simplex
I would encourage you to think critically about the nonsense being shared here. Do some research and read about people who actually know things about security and you'll find a common pattern: basically all of them hold Signal up as a gold standard in privacy and security.
Signal is an excellent alternative if you're looking for an E2E encrypted SMS replacement your grandmother can use.
Matrix, simplex, xmpp.
Where are you hearing this?
This is a difficult topic for me. On the one hand, I believe everyone has a right to privacy and we need to fight for that right. On the other hand, I'm enough of an adult to understand that law enforcement needs to be able to effectively investigate criminal activity. There has to be a middle ground there, somewhere. I just don't know where that is.
There's no middle ground. Either we'll have privacy or we won't.
If they actually wanted to do something about child abuse they'd go after the conserative scum who have historically supported it and still do. Its the ones that vote for far right parties, are anti higher-ed, pro homeschooling, anti secularism, pro religious indoctrination, anti feminist, anti age of consent laws, anti sex ed, anti criminalisation of marital rape, anti combating domestic violence, pro child marriages etc instead they are constantly trying to attack human's right to privacy which only exist on paper.
But isn't advocating for the privacy of criminals the same as advocating for the crime, itself? Sure, let's go after the politicians...but are you REALLY okay with letting child molesters, etc. hide their activities from law enforcement online? Like I said, there has to be a middle ground. We just need to find it.
There exist no middle ground.
If able to invade privacy of child abuser, able to invade privacy of any person. Then your "privacy" only is trust in authority to not abuse that not actually have privacy.
How that end you can see in china.
It's the warrant process and true encryption. If the cops think you've done something bad, they go and get a warrant. The provider turns over what they have, which should just be account info and metadata. Then the cops do good old fashioned police work and get a warrant for your personal stuff which they'll seize and analyze.
Welp then I think we have to sue them to oblivion S/ But really can’t blame most people whose Are Accustomed to using TeleGram And WhatsUp