Here’s what he said in a post on his telegram channel:
🤫 A story shared by Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter, uncovered that the current leaders of Signal, an allegedly “secure” messaging app, are activists used by the US state department for regime change abroad 🥷
🥸 The US government spent $3M to build Signal’s encryption, and today the exact same encryption is implemented in WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Google Messages and even Skype. It looks almost as if big tech in the US is not allowed to build its own encryption protocols that would be independent of government interference 🐕🦺
🕵️♂️ An alarming number of important people I’ve spoken to remarked that their “private” Signal messages had been exploited against them in US courts or media. But whenever somebody raises doubt about their encryption, Signal’s typical response is “we are open source so anyone can verify that everything is all right”. That, however, is a trick 🤡
🕵️♂️ Unlike Telegram, Signal doesn’t allow researchers to make sure that their GitHub code is the same code that is used in the Signal app run on users’ iPhones. Signal refused to add reproducible builds for iOS, closing a GitHub request from the community. And WhatsApp doesn’t even publish the code of its apps, so all their talk about “privacy” is an even more obvious circus trick 💤
🛡 Telegram is the only massively popular messaging service that allows everyone to make sure that all of its apps indeed use the same open source code that is published on Github. For the past ten years, Telegram Secret Chats have remained the only popular method of communication that is verifiably private 💪
Original post: https://t.me/durov/274
well, this is concerning to hear. i had no idea signal was funded by the US state
It is an eye raiser, but it is also somewhat of a red herring. Tor is a very solid privacy browser that started as a government project; not sure if they are still funded today. Nothing is ever going to be a perfect solution (cat and mouse game), but it does strike me that Telegram is more concerned about features than it is about privacy.
oh damn, didn’t know about tor’s history either! thank you for the relief. faith restored cautiously
Wait till you hear where the Tor money comes from. Funding is not a direct cause of issues.
just learned through another reply, thank you for putting my mind more at ease brothers 🤝
Let’s all just be adults and start using Matrix
This comes a few days after Jack Dorsey confirmed that he had left the board of Bluesky and then starting to use Tw(X)tter and calling Tw(X)tter “freedom technology”. Coincidence ?
???
Is this guy stupid or what, current day Twitter could not be further than “Freedom technology”.
You can barely even see Tweets while logged out for fucks sakeEarlier on Saturday, he unfollowed all but three accounts on X: Edward Snowden, Stella Assange, the wife of the WikiLeaks founder Julian, and Musk.
“Don’t depend on corporations to grant you rights,” Dorsey tweeted. “Defend them yourself using freedom technology. (you’re on one).”
Despite his promotion of alternatives to the site he founded, Dorsey has publicly shared his admiration for Musk. In 2022, he called the multibillionaire the “singular solution I trust” for the future of Twitter, though a year later he criticised Musk for his “fairly reckless” moves after taking control of the site.
Why all the emojis? Why can’t people just write an article?
It’s like a memetic form of neoteny, “the retention of juvenile traits into adulthood.”
I’m waiting for the day when a politician responds to a motion on the floor with “bruh.”
he is maybe flexing the “custom emojis” feature of telegram, see original post
It seems like you’re passionate about emojis
Telegram’s server side software is closed source, owned and ran by them exclusively so they really have no room to talk. WhatsApp doesn’t even have OSS clients so they’re even worse in that regard
exactly, they (Telegram) don’t need to put sketchy code in the clients when most messages are not E2E encrypted and they control the servers lol
There is SimpleX also
It has weaknesses as well but it isn’t bad
Telegram is the only massively popular messaging service that allows everyone to make sure that all of its apps indeed use the same open source code that is published on Github.
Not true. Signal has a very similar client verification process to Telegram’s, described here. The lack of an iOS reproducible build is an Apple limitation / nuisance.
It’s very complicated, the 2nd jailbroken device is necessary because there’s no other way to download the .ipa, but even if you manage to do that and bit-for-bit reproduce the .ipa you downloaded from source, there’s no way to know if the App Store is sending every user the same .ipa or if your other, non-jailbroken iPhone downloaded a backdoored one.
Telegram docs even acknowledge these limitations.
Ultimately, this client verification is not the selling point Telegram’s founder makes it sound like, since most messages are not E2EE and the server code is closed.
Lol telegram calling signal insecure is too funny.
Isn’t it that Telegram doesn’t claim to be super secure, apart from possibly their encryption on mobile?
This doesn’t prevent them from uncovering other possible plots in supposedly secure platforms.
True but in this case there credibility is low
arent telegram chats unencrypted by default?
An alarming number of important people I’ve spoken to remarked that their “private” Signal messages had been exploited against them in US courts or media
source?? (i bet this ends up being a “they had full access to my unlocked phone” situation again)
also the whole thing abt US funded encryption is the same bullshit argument ppl use against Tor all the time. it doesnt mean shit.
this just reads like someone desperately trying to get more market share by spreading FUD
“Signal is insecure”
- Putin probably
“an alarming number of important people” is the source. That’s more than enough, right?
im gonna assume ur joking. its hard to tell sarcasm on the internet.
obviously i would like an actual source like at least one of those “important” ppl talking abt what happened to them
😂. Of course I’m joking. That claim is bullshit. Hey I know a guy who sold a bridge, and he’s wealthy now. Source: trust me, he told me.
read: “all my rich white friends”
“Who work for Telegram”
“One rich dude I met once at a dinner party. Totally legit. “
Well, Telegram seems to be giving user data to the German Federal Criminal Police Office, and if they’re cooperating with the German authorities, I don’t see why I’d presume they aren’t cooperating with others as well.
All this is actually documented, compared to those nebulous “important people”.
Tbf, they held a user vote in Germany (supposedly, although the app did ask me to vote) whether to work with them or risk to cease services. Iirc the backgrounds were extremist (terrorist?) groups operating on the platform
arent telegram chats unencrypted by default?
Encryption is always there. Problem is, some people refer to anything “not e2e encrypted” as “unencrypted” for some reason.
And it infuriates me to no end. It’s one thing to trust them and their servers and it’s another thing altogether to send actual plaintext data around the net, that’s crazy and it’s what people are implying.
For the record, until WhatsApp implemented e2e their messages were indeed fucking plaintext, and it took a while before they were pressured into e2e. It helps for them that their platform is very mobile based vs telegram, where the service is more server based. Telegram did have enough time to implement a server based e2e 0 knowledge encryption protocol though, it’s not really rocket science at this point.
Telegram did have enough time to implement a server based e2e 0 knowledge encryption protocol though, it’s not really rocket science at this point.
What do you mean by server based e2e? From what I get, most people’s complain is that Telegram doesn’t support e2e in group chats, and that is what seems to be close to rocket science in my opinion. Also Telegram is historically filled with ever growing group chats, which means quite serious implications for server requirements from what I understand.
Tegram stores all the conversation in their servers, since you don’t need to be connected in the phone or have the phone witchednon if you want to chat in the pc, or in another phone. This means that the authority is the server. WhatsApp it’s not like that, if you delete a shared photo after a while it will be cached out and you will lost access to it, meaning that they don’t store that stuff. The same thing happens with WhatsApp desktop or web, they stay in an infinite loading icon until you twitch on the phone or sometimes even unlock it.
This means that whatever telegram develops must not only keep the group chat encrypted in the server, but any valid client of a user must be able to decipher the content, so every client must somehow have the key to unlock the content. One way of doing it would be for every client of a single user to generate keys (which I’m sure they already do) and reform a key exchange between them, to share that way a single shared key, which is what identifies your account. Then toy could use that shared key to decipher the group chat shared key which telegram can store on their server or do whatever is done in those cases, I’m not that well versed.
The problem here lies in what happens when you delete and/or logout of all the accounts, currently you can login into the server again, because telegram has all the info required, but if they store the “shared key” then it’s all moot, I guess they could store a user identifying key pair, with the private key encrypted with a password, so that it can be accessed from wherever. They should as always offer MFA and passkey alternatives to be able to identify as yourself every time you want to log into a new client, without requiring the password and so on.
This is some roughly designed idea I just had that should theoretically work, but I’m sure that there’s more elegant ways to go about this.
It’s work for sure to implement all of this in a secure way, provided that you have to somehow merge everything that already exists into the new encryption model, make everyone create a password and yada yada while making sure that it’s as seamless as possible for users. However, I feel like it’s been quite a while and that if they did not do it already, theybjist won’t, we either trust them with our data or search for an alternative, and sadly there’s no alternative that has all the fuzz right now.
Sorry I have a hard time understanding the gist of your text. I don’t think it’s viable to be upset about what happens with access that was already acquired previously because that very fact already poses a bigger threat (which might have more to do with the nature of conversations vs how the platform works).
I wasn’t talking about situations with compromised accounts, I was talking about legitimate accounts that were created in a typical way being converted to a zero knowledge encryption method, I was aknowledging that it’s hard doing that conversion when a user might have several clients logged on (2 phones, 6 computers…).
My point was that if they have not put any motivation in the transition, they never will because the bigger the userbase, the harder for them to manage the transition. Also, I find that sad because they should have invested more effort in that instead of all the features we are getting, but whatever.
If you found the technical terms confusing, public/private keys are some sort of asymmetric “passwords” used in cryptography that secure messages, and shared keys would be symmetrical passwords. The theory between key exchanges and all around those protocols are taught in introductory courses to cryptography in bachelors and masters, and I’m sorry to say that I don’t have the energy to explain more but feel free to read about the terms if you feel like it.
If you however found it confusing because I write like crap, I’m sorry for potentially offending you with the above paragraph and I’ll blame my phone keyboard about it :)
No that’s not what I didn’t understand. The problem itself as you described it seems either a non-issue or something very few people (who’s already using telegram for some time) would care about. I don’t understand the scenario that would pose a problem for the user. The moment some account legitimately gains access to some chat is probably what should trouble you instead.
The article about Maher is written by a conservative who can’t accept that we can limit individual freedom to reach true collective freedom.
Also he wrote for FoxNews lol
Stop spreading propaganda please, it’s just a CEO trying to shill its product
You can verify builds on android. That’s just an iphone problem.
Use Grapheneos if you need good security and privacy
I find it weird how any discussion about Signal will inevitably have a bunch of people piling on dismissing any criticisms of it. Believing that Signal is perfect has become like a religion at this point. Whatever people might think of Telegram is completely irrelevant when it comes to the question of whether Signal is actually a secure tool or not.
The fact that people working on Signal have direct ties to US intelligence agencies cannot be ignored. No can the fact that Signal is a centralized system based in US. These two things alone should make everybody very concerned.
Yeah, he needs to fix his broken secret chat feature first… I think it’s broken on purpose…
After seeing his interview with Tucker Carlson, I’m 100% sure the guy has some really dark agenda…
What’s broken there?
If someone really care about privacy you can use Session instead. Good luck!!
Sarcasm ? An Australian company, with zero constitutional protection from a 5 eyes nation? It screams honey pot
It’s that or the CIA, your choice…
Try Threema… Open source, Swiss based, audited. As you and your data are not the product of this company, it costs 5 bucks. Less than a Starbucks coffee, but I still have a hard time convincing my peers to switch. (Not affiliated with Threema, just a fan)
Thx for the info mate 👍👍
You are welcome!
Telegram: We keep you private. Now enter your phone number to sign up.
That breaks anonymity, not privacy
It breaks both
Signal is the same in that regards.
Was
Signal still requires a phone number to use it. What they recently added is the ability to message people without needing to know their phone number.
Oh, that sucks. My bad.
Signal does the same
I didn’t think that’s required anymore?
You still need a phone number to register an account as far as I could tell when I did the other day. You no longer need to share your number with any contacts and can set it so noone who has your number can look you up on signal. You can optionally set a unique alphanumeric ‘username’ instead to hand to people to look you up. But yea, Signal still requires you to give them and their authenticatian service (through sms code) your phone number.
Thanks for the clarification.
Np
Are there any equivalents that don’t need a phone number?
Yes, XMPP, a long-standing protocol that’s also not a walled garden, doesn’t require a phone number or even a phone. For android I use the Conversations client combined with Dino on computers. Currently logged in to a handful of devices synchronously. You can choose what server to make an account on; conversations.im I found to be reliable. Drawback is Signal doesn’t let you bridge to it from anywhere outside of Signal. So I have accounts on both.
It is
