• quaff@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    If Telegram is considered an encrypted messenger, then FB messenger should be too. Works exactly the same. I don’t know about you, but being the same level as FB messenger should speak volumes to whether Telegram is “encrypted” or not 🙄

      • quaff@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yeah, the fact that FB messenger uses Signal protocol, means the encryption is better recognized than the one used in Telegram. But the lack of on-by-default or the need to drill in a few options before enabling secret chats… I mean it’s even named the same thing as Telegram.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          the fact that FB messenger uses Signal protocol, means the encryption is better than the one used in Telegram.

          MTProto 2 has not been cracked. MTProto 1 had a weakness and Telegram addressed it. That was many years ago. I’m not aware that MTProto 2 has ever been cracked in all these years. Telegram’s unwillingness to cooperate with governments is an additional security layer.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            MTProto 2 has not been cracked.

            What’s important is that it hasn’t been confirmed good by actual normal cryptographers. It’s science, not school debates.

            Telegram’s unwillingness to cooperate with governments is an additional security layer.

            No person ever instructed in security would say something this childishly asinine!

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              What’s important is that it hasn’t been confirmed good by actual normal cryptographers.

              Why not?

              • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I dunno. It’s just not.

                Shows like “we have a reward to crack it, nobody’s done this, so we’re very cool” are not sufficient.

          • quaff@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            In my OP, I was merely referring to how FB Messenger and Telegram functions the same.

            Speaking to the protocol used for encryption is a moot point… because even if MTProto 2 was better, it’s still not enabled by default in both messengers.

        • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It doesn’t matter what Facebook or WhatsApp say they use, their source code is closed, you can’t prove their words, meaning they don’t have e2ee. You can with Signal, you can with Telegram.

          • quaff@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Telegram needs to enable e2ee by default, cause the way it is now, you may as well not have it.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      If Telegram is considered an encrypted messenger, then FB messenger should be too.

      But strangely only one is being prosecuted.

      • quaff@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I suspect that’s because Telegram’s marketing and it’s users consistently try to place Telegram in the same categories as actually secure and encrypted messengers. Whereas I don’t see tech blogs claiming that FB messenger is secure.

    • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s ridiculous, Telegram client is opensource, Facebook is not. We know for a fact that Facebook shares their data with… well, anyone. The reason of the recent arrest of the Telegram CEO seems to be that he apparently doesn’t share anything.

      • quaff@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean that is a fair point. But open source client only matters if people were using Telegram’s secret chats consistently. The closed source server is what’s most important when almost all communication happens plain text.