korrents

korrents · piece

Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

Matthew Green · 25 Aug 2024

Others here said this too

Encryption people have to switch on protects almost nobody; what protects people is what a service turns on for everyone.

To be honest though, it doesn’t matter how secure something is if people aren’t actually using it.

Also said by Moxie Marlinspike

Read the piece on blog.cryptographyengineering.com ↗

4 korrents from this piece ↓

Matthew Green did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

  1. Telegram clearly fails to meet this stronger definition for a simple reason: it does not end-to-end encrypt conversations by default.
  2. The practical impact is that the vast majority of one-on-one Telegram conversations — and literally every single group chat — are probably visible on Telegram’s servers, which can see and record the content of all messages sent between users.
  3. Indeed, it no longer feels amusing to see the Telegram organization urge people away from default-encrypted messengers, while refusing to implement essential features that would widely encrypt their own users’ messages.
  4. To be honest though, it doesn’t matter how secure something is if people aren’t actually using it.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.