Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Paul Cantrell

Lest it get lost in that longer post:

Assume Telegram is compromised. Not just vulnerable. Compromised.

21 comments
George Girton

@inthehands I could never keep the super secure messaging systems straight to begin with๐Ÿธ๐Ÿ‘€๐Ÿ˜บ

skze :nonbinary_flag:

@inthehands that was my thought exactly. i am wondering how much of a security the app on my phone is now.

Aral Balkan

@inthehands Always have. This is just further validation.

keithzg
@aral @inthehands Yeah once you hear they home rolled, it's just be silly not to take it as granted
pettter

@inthehands I'd assume the same of Signal, to be honest. You're not safe and secure against a nation-state actor, especially not running software from that country communicating through servers run in that country.

The question is if you're worth them exposing that operation (you're probably not).

it takes a village

@pettter @inthehands signal lead dev Moxie(an Israeli citizen) took millions from the cia. Itโ€™s got a backdrop.

stateless person

@pettter @inthehands

Disagree.

The question is whether you're high-profile enough that them compromising you (using a tool they own, in an environment they control) would result in their "operation" being "exposed" to a degree that would result in their operation being disrupted.

If you're anything like me, probably not.

(There's an entire class of people who can get disappeared in plain sight and everyone will automatically hallucinate their own thought-terminating explanation. Sucks)

shushi mushi
Konstantin Weddige

@pettter @inthehands While I agree that it's good to expect compromise of whatever technology you're using, I don't think this take is really helpful.

The assumption that everything is compromised, apart from discussing strategies for dealing with it, just takes away our ability to make informed decisions. We have limited knowledge of the capabilities of the relevant threat actors, so we have to weight the probability that a particular implementation is still secure.

lucas

@inthehands that's essentially the conclusion I lead myself to when both dorsey and musk were on the anti-signal train.

Ash_Crow

@lucas @inthehands Dorsey gives one million dollars per year to the Signal Foundation (or at least claimed to). That doesn't sound anti-Signal reuters.com/technology/jack-do

lucas

@Ash_Crow @inthehands Not saying he didn't, but that article, and every article I could find, said he "would" not, "has" - and it was 2 years ago.

He also just quit bluesky and is saying X is a "freedom technology"

So, I still have doubts about his motivations.

Dakki Reads

@inthehands I just assume that anything that sells itself as being safe from the feds is run by the feds

Go Up