News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Cryptographers unearth vulnerabilities in Telegram's encr... by maqp on Sunday July 18, 2021 @03:14PM (#27875669)
>Telegram is fast

It's fast because it's insecure. Would they deploy end-to-end encryption for their groups, it would be as slow as the competition.

>has native clients instead of a garbage web ui

The "native clients" are used to manage data stored on remote server over an encrypted tunnel. The data that sits on Telegram servers is plaintext. The security benefits of the native clients (e.g. handling E2EE in a secure way) don't really play out when the desktop application doesn't feature end-to-end encryption at all, not even for 1:1 chats.

>has better stickers than the alternatives,

My Signal client has 1:1 match of my Telegram sticker packs. This is a non-issue. Porting them is trivial.

>has a larger user base

Sure, which means, larger amount of your data is hoarded by the Mark Zuckerberg of Russia who will take zero responsibility if his servers are hacked.

Just a thought: You should probably refrain from advertising features of an app the glaring security issues of which you can ignore out of your privilege. There's a LOT of oppressive regimes in the world, and people living there shouldn't take your advice.

Re:Cryptographers unearth vulnerabilities in Telegram's encr... by isatty on Sunday July 18, 2021 @05:04PM (#27876655)
I don't understand your first two rebuttals. I didn't want to keep talking about the fact that Telegram is not secure by default (there are plenty of other comments that go into this); I understand this, thank you.

It doesn't have anything to do with the competition being unable to provide a fast _native client_ that I can use. I dislike web based apps, and I refuse to use them whenever a native alternative is available.

> It's fast because it's insecure. Would they deploy end-to-end encryption for their groups, it would be as slow as the competition.

Doubtful - it would increase the amount of compute required on their side, sure, but if done properly it will have close to 0 impact on the end users in terms of latency.

> Mark Zuckerberg of Russia who will take zero responsibility if his servers are hacked.

As opposed to _x_ from country _y_ that WILL take responsibility if their servers are hacked? Please.

I will continue to talk about what I like about the user interface and what it does better than the competition because I want to.

[dead]
Re:Cryptographers unearth vulnerabilities in Telegram's encr... by dijit on Sunday July 18, 2021 @07:13PM (#27877564)
> I'd use native Signal desktop client written on Rust if there was an option. But there isn't, thus I'm using the Electron app.

I’m not going to say anything else other than that this is exactly what Signal wants. They are actively hostile towards efforts to make third-party clients.

You can argue that this is for security reasons, and maybe I’d buy that.

But I would also bring up the fact that they implicitly control both ends in a binary distributed or web(thus- backdoorable) fashion most of the time. I’m not saying they do that, but since they have control of the clients, the servers and the protocol it is not impossible.

Re:Cryptographers unearth vulnerabilities in Telegram's encr... by maqp on Sunday July 18, 2021 @08:23PM (#27877982)
Reproducible builds help here. Not all clients are supported yet I give you that, but perhaps you can see how far injecting backdoored clients on mass scale is from "user's sending plaintext copy to server every time". Both achieve the same thing, one will fill the headline of every news paper in the world if it happens once, the other happens right now, billions of times a day, and nobody cares. There's no perfect verification process, but there's a metric fuckton of low hanging fruits we need to address first.
Re:Cryptographers unearth vulnerabilities in Telegram's encr... by isatty on Sunday July 18, 2021 @07:10PM (#27877537)
HN is not the place where you get to tell people to check their privilege or to warn people. Write a blogpost, or write to dang@ if you feel strongly about it.