Ok, we changed the URL above from https://gitlab.com/edu4rdshl/blog/blob/master/why-telegram-i... to https://medium.com/@thegrugq/operational-telegram-cbbaadb901....

At present the OP is nearly blank anyhow.

Thanks. Should maybe put in (2015) in the title as well? It is old and hasn’t been updated.

I stand by my assessment at the time, but I haven’t checked Telegram since then and don’t know what, if anything, has changed.

I think your post should highlight the main idea: Telegram stores all messages in plain-text on the server. Even whatsapp doesn’t do that.

Seems to me like the “end to end” was an afterthought. Just to claim that they can encrypt messages. While 99% of messages are stored right there, and we must trust telegram not to give that data to anyone. Why should we?

They added references a couple of minutes ago, I think very large chunks of their post should still be in quote blocks though. Great writeup btw, grugq https://gitlab.com/edu4rdshl/blog/commit/2fc4d85714d2bde3aca...

Thanks

I've had a couple of popular medium posts copied by a person looking to boost the visibility of his consulting company site. It's frustrating, but I think ultimately it does the thief more harm than good.

Author just edited it and added your post as a reference:

https://gitlab.com/edu4rdshl/blog/commit/2fc4d85714d2bde3aca...

...

+ 7 https://medium.com/@thegrugq/operational-telegram-cbbaadb901... by https://twitter.com/thegrugq

He did only after I publicly called him out[0]. And it is still plagiarism.

“Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.”[1]

[0] https://twitter.com/Edu4rdSHL/status/1081971696431706113

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism

And the other parts of the post are copied verbatim from the MTProto paper.

Check out the "MTProto is not IND-CCA secure" section Eduard Toloza supposedly wrote: https://gitlab.com/edu4rdshl/blog/blob/9d490385d53cdf7048d16...

> Here I briefly present the two attacks that show that MTProto is not IND-CCA secure. We assume the reader to be familiar with the notion of IND-CCA security...

> Once again, I stress that the attacks are only of theoretical nature and we do not see a way of turning them into full-plaintext recovery. Yet, we believe that these attacks are yet another proof [https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/428.pdf] that designing your own crypto rarely is a good idea.

And compare it to Jakob Jakobsen and Claudio Orlandi's paper: https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/1177.pdf

The "author" just swapped out the "we" for "I". Aside from the text in bold at the bottom, there's no original content. It's plagiarism.

If you still believe this is plagiarism (after the citation edit), then your recourse is to notify Gitlab, where this is hosted on.

https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/dmca/

It is plagiarism, that is not debatable.

After contacting the author he has removed the plagiarized content.

Is it still plagiarism if the original author hides his writing behind a pseudonym?

Yes. Plagiarism is stealing another authors ideas, words, or expressions and representing them as one’s own work.

And I’m pretty sure comments like this are against HN policy as they degrade the quality of discourse.

Is it still theft if the thief hides his actions behind an alias?