Investigation by investigative journalism outlet IStories (EN version by OCCRP) shows that Telegram uses a single, FSB-linked company as their infrastructure provider globally.

Telegram’s MTProto protocol also requires a cleartext identifier to be prepended to all client-server messages.

Combined, these two choices by Telegram make it into a surveillance tool.

I am quoted in the IStories story. I also did packet captures, and I dive into the nitty-gritty technical details on my blog.

Packet captures and MTProto deobfuscation library I wrote linked therein so that others can retrace my steps and check my work.

    • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      3 days ago

      For the internet messenger functionality that would be Signal.

      For other things (channels, mostly), anything that does not pretend to be end-to-end encrypted when it is not. A website with an RSS feed would be one trivial choice for channels that are open to anyone. Public communication like that has no business going through “platforms”.

      • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I would most definitely not recommend Matrix for private or sensitive communication, no.

        https://soatok.blog/2024/07/31/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-signal-competitor/
        https://soatok.blog/2024/08/14/security-issues-in-matrixs-olm-library/

        Matrix is fine as IRC replacement, it might also be a decent replacement for Telegram’s channels thingy, sure. But I would not trust my family photos to it. Much less anything actually important.

        • Avatar of Vengeance@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          That guy again lmao why do “security researchers” keep recommending signal with that softheaded blog. Get real

          • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            So, you drop into a thread about a pretty technically involved analysis of one protocol (MTProto), and in response to a post linking to another pretty technically involved analysis of another protocol (Matrix/Olm) all you have to offer is “that softheaded blog”?

            I mean I would expect some finesse with the insults. I understand that diving into the technical nitty-gritty might not be your thing, and that’s totally fine, but at the very least don’t deny us the entertainment factor of a well-rounded invective!

            • Avatar of Vengeance@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Oh, you’ll just have forgive me for not diving into the high-level discussion of whether Signal is better for furries because of the UI needs of differently-abled individuals. It’s just too complicated for me. 😖

        • troed@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s all FUD. Matrix is as secure as Signal if you - like Signal - rely on a single centralized server. Actually, since you can host it yourself, it would be even more secure since you don’t need to trust Signal.

          (I defend infrastructure and perform hacks against cryptograph & protocols for a living)

          • dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            My question was specifically about “the general non-technical population”. Do you expect my mom to even remotely understand what different servers are and why talking to me is securely encrypted but talking to her friends group isn’t? The point about secure software is that it needs to be secure by default or else, entry level users will manage to accidentally send their stuff in plain text and not even notice.

            For nerds like us, I agree that Matrix is probably a good choice. For someone who needed to be told that “the internet” isn’t the blue “e” on their desktop… not so much. I’d rather send carrier pigeons than explain Matrix to my family.

            • troed@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              My extended family use Matrix - including my elderly parents. It’s no more difficult to understand than any other service.

          • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            3 days ago

            (I defend infrastructure and perform hacks against cryptograph & protocols for a living)

            If you need to say it…

        • arsCynic@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          I would most definitely not recommend Matrix for private or sensitive communication, no.
          https://soatok.blog/2024/07/31/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-signal-competitor/
          https://soatok.blog/2024/08/14/security-issues-in-matrixs-olm-library/
          Matrix is fine as IRC replacement, it might also be a decent replacement for Telegram’s channels thingy, sure. But I would not trust my family photos to it. Much less anything actually important.

          Regarding Soatok, I am prone to completely ignore impolite individuals. As far as my experience goes, and for most of the general populace, Matrix is fine. And it is likely to continue improving. Compared to Signal and Telegram, who both incentivize crypto"currencies", a.k.a. tech bro multi-level marketing pyramid schemes, enshittification has already begun.

          Roy says: August 6, 2024 at 4:28 pm
          Interesting post! I would be really interested in knowing your opinion on SimpleX Chat.

          Soatok says: August 6, 2024 at 4:55 pm
          See, this is exactly the fucking problem. I never invited anyone to query me to look at YET ANOTHER fucking chat app. Yet this still keeps happening. Doing security reviews is labor. You’re asking me to work for free to satisfy your curiosity. This is annoying to do. I don’t have a fucking opinion about SimpleX. I don’t have an opinion about a lot of apps. If I want to share my opinion, I’ll blog about it WITHOUT being prompted. Until then, please stop asking.
          By Post Author

          • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Regarding Soatok, I am prone to completely ignore impolite individuals.

            Please feel free to ignore me as well then, because saying that technical analysis by an expert can be outright ignored just because the expert happened to be impolite that one time might make me become somewhat impolite.

            Imagine getting dozens of randos in your replies asking about dozens of random chat apps. At some point I am pretty sure you’d also reach a breaking point. Some would call that kind of behaviour a bit impolite, I’d wager.

            • arsCynic@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              I’m not saying arguments necessarily become invalid because of impoliteness. But to me it doesn’t convey trustworthiness on first impression, especially when not knowing someone. The world / the Internet already contains so much toxicity, there’s no need for needless additional discord. Especially when encountering something frustrating on the Internet—as opposed to real life—it is trivial to just take a breath, go for a walk, and come back and respond peacefully. The simplest thing for Soatok to have done would be to ignore the message, or use AutoKey to paste a generic neutral response denying the request.

                • arsCynic@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  Why do you conflate politeness and trustworthiness? Seems like a weird connection to make.

                  Is it really that weird? Imagine someone going to a store and the owner starts swearing at them because they asked a question. Would said visitor be more or less likely to trust the owner? I agree that being impolite doesn’t necessarily equate to being ignorant in one’s subject, but I wouldn’t be surprised that on average the most knowledgeable and wise tend to be more polite.

                  • Vodulas [they/them]@beehaw.org
                    cake
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    Because the inverse of that is how people get conned. Someone blowing absolute smoke with a confident tone and a sweet word. Tone is about the worst indicator of trustworthiness

              • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Soatak

                Soatok. At least get the name right.

                The simplest thing for [Soatok] to have done would be to ignore the message

                Which also happens to be the simplest thing you could have done, even simpler as none of the toots you quote were addressed to you. Instead, you are dragging this one random exchange into this thread about something else entirely.

                • arsCynic@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  The simplest thing for Soatok to have done would be to ignore the message

                  Which also happens to be the simplest thing you could have done, even simpler as none of the toots you quote were addressed to you. Instead, you are dragging this one random exchange into this thread about something else entirely.

                  Does it really matter whether or not it is addressed to me? And, the simplest route is not necessarily the most virtuous one. To take an extreme example, if I see someone being bullied I will interfere to stop the bully and console the target. Here, I am simply arguing in favor of less toxicity for it improves credibility.

                  • Soatok Dreamseeker@pawb.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    You say you’re arguing in favor of less toxicity, but your example was a screenshot of a comment where I asserted my own healthy boundaries (after being needled by hundreds of demands in the form of “what about <other app>?” from strangers over the course of months).

                    Which is more toxic?