Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by codedokode on Saturday October 10, 2026 @07:01PM
(#50038020)
Signal requires a phone number and does not want anonymous users, so I do not want it too.
Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by dimatter on Saturday October 10, 2026 @08:29PM
(#50038510)
so does Telegram
Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by codedokode on Saturday October 10, 2026 @08:50PM
(#50038660)
But Matrix does not. I wish they removed email requirement too though.
Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by wolvoleo on Saturday October 10, 2026 @10:02PM
(#50039094)
It depends on the matrix server, they don't have to require an email address per se.
Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by drnick1 on Saturday October 10, 2026 @08:36PM
(#50038557)
The phone number is only required to create an account, and is never used again IIRC. The rationale for it was to prevent abuse/spam, but I believe there is now an option to purchase an account for a small fee without needing a phone number.
Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by codedokode on Saturday October 10, 2026 @08:49PM
(#50038655)
Purchase can be done only through Apple/Google Pay which require a phone number and a bank card on top of that. Do not be deceived by marketing people.
Re:Telegram Desktop vulnerability allowed any user's file to...
by wolvoleo on Saturday October 10, 2026 @10:01PM
(#50039087)
Yeah having to doxx yourself to avoid giving a phone number is a bit disappointing for a privacy-conscious messenger app.
Especially because they have their own crypto coin right there in the app so why not allow payments with that?
Telegram is connected to Eastern European and the Middle Eastern countries and not in a good way, and the server-side components are closed source. There is no E2EE by default.