Automated Symbolic Verification of Telegram's MTProto 2.0

Re:Automated Symbolic Verification of Telegram's MTProto 2.0 by approxim8ion on Sunday January 10, 2021 @10:32PM (#25724078)

The bounty isn't as much of an assurance as they would have you believe. Good publicity nonetheless.

Relevant article from Moxie Marlinespike: https://archive.vn/SIl9M

A theorized valid attack that was deemed invalid by the fine print in their bounty program: https://web.archive.org/web/20181118154823/https://www.alexr...

These are criticisms of MTproto 1, there is barely any literature about the new version.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Automated Symbolic Verification of Telegram's MTProto 2.0 by Anon1096 on Monday January 11, 2021 @12:16AM (#25724868)

I think this exact comment sequence with these exact links has been played out on every Hacker News thread about Telegram since its inception.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Automated Symbolic Verification of Telegram's MTProto 2.0 by ffpip on Monday January 11, 2021 @12:24AM (#25724921)

Yeah I know it's just publicity. Just like 'Apple will pay 1 million dollars for iphone hack' articles.

But Moxie (or any other cryptographer) could use the money for Signal's development. It's a large amount.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Automated Symbolic Verification of Telegram's MTProto 2.0 by bjoli on Monday January 11, 2021 @01:40AM (#25725476)

Moxie clearly states that: the competition is framed in such a way that it would be bordering impossible to break it even uf it had been using primitives known to be broken.

[ Parent | on HN ]