undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdijit4y ago0 comments

Telegrams stupidity was marketing itself as secure. If it never had, then all arguments and sour intent towards it would be hugely misplaced.

As it stands, it’s not E2E by default and it’s E2E scheme is homegrown- which is usually not recommended (though IMO was not a dealbreaker), the big issue there was that there were flaws in the original design of the encryption scheme which makes it harder to look passed the fact it’s homegrown.

Telegram can intercept most messages on the platform, however, ultimately I trust them more than Facebook; so I’m less concerned.

Additionally, since Facebook controls _both_ ends of whatsapp _and_ does not support third party programs, then even though WhatsApp is E2E there’s little preventing Facebook from pushing an update to your phone which backs up all your chats to their cloud.

0 comments

screamingninja4y ago

> As it stands, it’s not E2E by default

Yes, and enabling E2E "secret chats" on Telegram actually hurts user experience, so most non-tech-savvy users avoid it. Additionally, your address book is continuously synced to Telegram servers.

> there’s little preventing Facebook from pushing an update to your phone which backs up all your chats to their cloud

Just to add to your point- WhatsApp currently backs up your chat history to Google Drive or iCloud unencrypted. It requires opt-in but they nudge you frequently.

luckylion4y ago

> Additionally, your address book is continuously synced to Telegram servers.

It doesn't even need access to contacts to run, and it happily runs on machines that don't even have address books (and, might I add, has the best UX there as well).

What you do need, at least for initial signup, is the ability to receive SMS, like you do with Signal. I wish all of them would just stop that nonsense.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse