Viber adds end-to-end encryption

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by skrowl on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @09:08AM (#11526650)

Telegram had e2e private chats for over a year before WhatsApp added e2e

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by subliminalpanda on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @09:17AM (#11526692)

The problem with Telegram is that it doesn't default to E2E; using it means to go through that additional step of starting a secret chat which I venture a lot of people won't do unless they're very conscious of it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by exo762 on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @09:11AM (#11526668)

Does bad crypto counts? I don't think so.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by goodplay on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @10:40AM (#11527286)

I keep seeing this accusation get flung around whenever someone mentions telegram but never proof. I remember telegram had a vulnerability once and then it was patched just like any other security software.

You shouldn't throw around accusations without proof.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by CiPHPerCoder on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @10:52AM (#11527376)

Here's your proof: http://cs.au.dk/~jakjak/master-thesis.pdf

https://moxie.org/blog/telegram-crypto-challenge/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by goodplay on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @10:57AM (#11527424)

Is it cryptographicly broken or not? Can I read the plain text of the traffic I capture?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by CiPHPerCoder on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @11:05AM (#11527476)

https://tonyarcieri.com/all-the-crypto-code-youve-ever-writt...

The word "broken" means susceptible to practical attack, and attacks aren't always of the "cryptanalyze the ciphertext and read the plaintext because you're a clever mathematician" variety.

For example: Padding Oracle Attacks. This is the most accessible explanation on-hand: https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/720435675401744385

A padding oracle attack lets you decrypt a message by studying how the cryptosystem responds to garbage input. Without recovering the key.

iMessage had a compression oracle attack recently: http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/attack-of-we...

They didn't merely "read the plain text of the traffic [they] capture[d]". But these systems were still, quite badly, broken.

So what's my point? Telegram's protocol is susceptible to the same class of active attack. Thus, it is broken.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by ianmiers on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @01:34PM (#11528634)

To add, Telegram's crypto is completely and totally off the walls crazy in terms of design. Add to that the fact that there are cryptographic breaks (though not we can read your ciphertext breaks), and you should be careful.

iMessage would have been reasonably secure had they used AEC-GCM or a MAC. The design at least made sense: compose a scheme out of known primitives. They just missed (very important) details. Telegram is just turtles all the way down.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by wodenokoto on Wednesday April 20, 2016 @06:20AM (#11533347)

Yes, but large, established services switching is another ball game. Even is Viper is not nearly as big as it used to be.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by randommar on Tuesday April 19, 2016 @11:55AM (#11527824)

signal?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Viber adds end-to-end encryption by wodenokoto on Wednesday April 20, 2016 @06:23AM (#11533356)

Signal is a niche service. Its selling point is security. Viper and WhatsApp are general services and their selling point isn't security.

I'm not trying to imply that WhatsApp are the first secure chat, but I am saying it is the first major platform to switch to end-to-end security and this looks like the first step in a trend of switching.

[ Parent | on HN ]