Signal-Desktop doesn't need your phone to be on, either. It's not the nicest desktop client (and some people dislike that it's implemented as a Chrome/chromium App), but unlike WhatsApp Web it's independent of the phone.

Is it still insecure?

http://gizmodo.com/why-you-should-stop-using-telegram-right-...

Leaving the crypto protocol aside, it's also important to know that only "Secret Chats" using End-to-End encryption.[0]

[0] https://telegram.org/faq#q-so-how-do-you-encrypt-data

That article is complete bullshit. I sent them a big email pointing out mistake after mistake and of course never got any response nor did they publish anything to correct their "journalism".

There are legitimate concerns with Telegram that I share with all other technically inclined people, but this article is like saying "use a firewalled Windows 95 instead" because something is wrong with Vista. You really should disregard everything they say because the true parts are too interwoven with fabrications.

Sure, I didn't look for an amazing article, just remember hearing about their homebrew "crypto" years ago and going eww.

This might be slightly better:

http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/130559/is-telegr...

You should provide some specific counterpoints and sources to back said points up - because rolling their own encryption is by itself reason enough not to use them. defaulting encryption to off is just icing on the cake

Let's see, what does the article say?

- Telegram isn't end-to-end encrypted per default: true

- Telegram uses homebrew encryption (MTproto): true

- Telegram presence information, at one point, could be read by someone who isn't your contact: true

It is as insecure and secure as Signal is, that means, for some actors, that is for some governements and corporations it is secure, while for others it is not.

Eh, Telegram looks more insecure [1] AFAICT. Sure, Signal will not stand up to high threat models due to hardware failings (backdoored baseband RTOS, missing dual backup RTC batteries for secure boot) and software failings (insecure Android), about the only thing designed to be attacked like that is a terminal like a Pax S80 or a Verifone VX520 and they do a bunch of fun stuff with magnetic tamper sensors, conductive wires that tear on opening, heat sensors, etc.

Then again, that isn't the threat model Signal is designed for, and if you are looking to protect against that type of threat model you could totally design hardware to support it for not too much (see Blackphone) and throw Replicant on there (with some development of course). Then, if it were Signal vs Telegram, the latter would likely be your security weakness.

[1] - http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/130559/is-telegr...

Not only is Telegram far less secure --- even when its opt-in(!) end-to-end messaging is enabled --- than Signal, but Reuters has reported that Iran has exploited some of its faults to hijack accounts and track activists. Don't use Telegram.

You should be embarrassed to be repeating these falsehoods on this thread.

your falsehood claims are no better, Joe. telegram puts their money where their claims are. and you cite reuters as reputable source. just wow.

Yeah, using GCM to wake up the device is totally worse than sending 99% messages without end-to-end encryption.

What's wrong with Reuters? Would you prefer RT?

So Iran can claim 300k award for breaking telegram crypto, can it?

That reward is bullshit. Their requirements are so strict that no one could defeat it. If they did that same challenge in Iran, Iran would win the challenge and the reward.

what requirements are you talking about?

https://telegram.org/blog/cryptocontest https://core.telegram.org/contest300K

This one: https://telegram.org/crypto_contest

How does it relate to 300k contest i am talking about?

Signal is providing usage data to Google, it is not anonymous, the messages sent are available for Google to decrypt at wish.

Telegram is open to Russian version of NSA, and the company that made it.

For me and you both, it doesnt matter, unless you work for NSA.

This is false. See http://support.whispersystems.org/hc/en-us/articles/21584359...

I didnt mean the messages are available to decrypt, that messages would hit GCM or that encryption methods are flawed or anything like that.

More like, Google has root on your phone so it can steal your private keys any time.

Your friends can just trust the default server when using riot.im. Thats what they do on Signal, Telegram, Whatsapp or any other chat app.

I am trying to Switch to riot (matrix) as well. Specially now that they have e2e crypto.