As said in another comment of mine, putting a generic "hey I might be wrong" at the end is pure fluff. Stick to what you believe in, you are not in front of a court.
Case in point: the Hanlon's Razor mention definitely did mislead me in terms of your stance.
I found it ambiguous, nothing more. And I expressed an opinion to which half I subscribe to. Maybe that's valuable feedback for you as a writer, maybe it's not.
In any case, no hard feelings were intended anywhere.
The situation is (slightly) ambiguous. It looks like a backdoor. Anyone competent writing that code would be doing so because they wanted the backdoor. But there's no reason to assume Telegram's authors are competent unnecessarily, and competence in UI design doesn't imply competence in security. And it's also a rather obvious-looking backdoor, anyone competent would presumably try to hide it better. Then again, the NSA backdoor in Dual-EC-DRBG was pointed out before anyone started using the spec and not that well hidden, and the NSA are generally considered competent.
