Ignoring the context.

Don’t pirate over Telegram, it’s no longer safe in terms of privacy and legal safety.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    922 months ago

    Meh, you never could trust them.

    Group chats were NEVER encrypted, so I’m surprised that people are just now figuring out that if it’s not encrypted = people can read it.

    If it wasn’t a 1:1 “secret chat” encrypted message, then congrats, you weren’t as opsec-y as you thought you were.

    • Luke
      link
      fedilink
      English
      462 months ago

      This kind of confusion illustrated by Telegram users is exactly why it was the right thing to do for privacy when Signal removed support for SMS because it’s not encrypted. People still whine endlessly about it, but most users are not very savvy, and they’ll assume “this app is secure” and gleefully send compromised SMS to each other. All the warnings and UI indicators that parts of the app were less secure (or not at all in the case of SMS) would be ignored by many users, resulting in an effectively more dangerous app. Signal was smart to remove those insecure features entirely.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        142 months ago

        Yeah. You can’t offer a half-secure and half-private platform and expect your average person to be able to figure out which half is which, which leads to crazy misconceptions, misunderstandings, and ultimately just a bunch of wrong and misleading information being passed around.

        I’d argue, though, that Telegram probably did this on purpose, and profited GREATLY from being obtuse and misleading.

        • Venia Silente
          link
          fedilink
          English
          92 months ago

          Don’t Google hold the keys to the kingdom on that one? I see it as unlikely that Signal adds support.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 months ago

            At the moment, essentially.

            The way Google got carrier buy-in for yet another messaging platform was to basically run it for them at no charge.

            The carriers COULD run their own RCS infra, but if you’re getting the milk for free, why buy the cow?

          • @RamblingPanda
            link
            English
            22 months ago

            I’m not sure, at least iMessage will add RCS. But this has the benefit to get the correct chat bubble color for Google. I’m not sure if there’ll be anything to gain for them to include Signal. Maybe the EU will force them.

            • Chewy
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              RCS isn’t E2E, and it doesn’t minimize metadata.

              Moxie Marlinspike has been strongly against federation in Signal because of how it makes avoiding metadata almost impossible.

              I’d say there’s basically zero chances Signal will add RCS.

              • @RamblingPanda
                link
                English
                52 months ago

                E2E is not in the standard, but the Google implementation uses it.

                Google added end-to-end encryption to their Messages app using the Signal Protocol as the default option for one-on-one RCS conversations starting in June 2021,[88] [89] (83] [90] In December 2022, end-to-end encryption was added to group chats in the Google Messages app for beta users and was made available to all users in August 2023.

                Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services

                • Chewy
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  32 months ago

                  You’re right. I’ve read somewhere that Apple plans to work with GSMA to add encryption to the official RCS standard, so this major issue hopefully gets fixed at some point.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      That’s why I stopped using it. They require a phone number, phone numbers require kyc with an ID around here, and there’s just too much illegal shit on there.

      It’s of course possible to get a more pseudonymous experience, but honestly, what they offer isn’t worth the hastle.