I am liking how this time around a lot of people are outright calling the media out on their parroting Telegram's PR bullshit about how "encrypted, secure, private" the service is.

(it is not.)

As in, not just writing about how Telegram is neither of these things, but very clearly pointing a finger at the media and going: "stop spreading this misinformation, you are putting people in danger."

Keep this pressure on!

#Telegram #Media #InfoSec

Yesterday I shared my own write-up on Telegram's failings, today I came across Matthew Green's stellar blogpost:
https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram-is-not-really-an-encrypted-messaging-app/

And this blogpost *starts* with calling the media out on this.

Fantastic.

At this point it's clear Telegram has no interest in fixing their stuff. We should not be talking to them, we should be talking about them to the media so that they stop promoting it.

Because as I said yesterday: that constitutes journalistic malpractice.

#Telegram #Media #InfoSec

Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

This blog is reserved for more serious things, and ordinarily I wouldn’t spend time on questions like the above. But much as I’d like to spend my time writing about exciting topics, som…

A Few Thoughts on Cryptographic Engineering
@rysiek That was actually the blog I found while research possible #telegram vulnerabilities while trying to get a bead on it. I don't use Telegram so this is more an interest to see what's going on. lol

Great post, hits the nail right on the head. Thanks for sharing this @rysiek.

This kind of journalistic malpractice is usually caused by ignorance, in which case they need to be called in and patiently educated. But in some cases I think there is an intent to mislead, by people who ought to know better. They need to be contacted in private and given a chance to retract and apologise, and if they don't, they need to be publicly called out on their wilful malpractice.

#journalism #TechJournalism

@strypey I am a bit less generous. Journalists should not need to be told that journalism is more than parroting PR statements and marketing materials…

"Indeed, it no longer feels amusing to see the Telegram organization urge people away from default-encrypted messengers, while refusing to implement essential features that would widely encrypt their own users’ messages. In fact, it’s starting to feel a bit malicious."

#MatthewGreen, 2024

https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram-is-not-really-an-encrypted-messaging-app/

#TeleGram

Is Telegram really an encrypted messaging app?

This blog is reserved for more serious things, and ordinarily I wouldn’t spend time on questions like the above. But much as I’d like to spend my time writing about exciting topics, som…

A Few Thoughts on Cryptographic Engineering

#Telegram always smelt like a honeypot to me;

* centralised, tick (like Signal)

* encryption doesn't work for groups, only 1:1, tick (like Signal)

* opt-in E2EE for 1:1 chats while heavily promoted as "encrypted messenger", tick (unlike Signal)

* Roll-Your-Own cryptography, tick (maybe like Signal, but crucially...)

* no source code published for server, so no independent auditing of cryptographic primitives or implementations, tick (unlike Signal)

I can't fathom why anyone uses it.

One more honeypot quality of Telegrab;

* Setting up an account requires a working phone number, tick (unlike Signal as of Feb 2024)

In countries (eg China) that don't allow unregistered mobile connections ("burner" phone numbers), this associates a 'secure messaging' account with an identifiable person.

Signal had the same problem for most of it's history, and until Feb 2024, it shared the phone number with anyone the account chatted with;

https://www.androidcentral.com/apps-software/signal-rolls-out-usernames

#HoneyPot #Telegram #Signal

Signal users can now keep their phone numbers provide with usernames

The tightest end-to-end encrypted messaging app just got a little more secure.

Android Central
@strypey it's the other way around, lol. signal and telegram both always required a phone number, but telegram always had usernames and after mass bruteforcing during hong kong protests they also added option to make you impossible to find by phone number. signal got those features only recently, and it still requires a phone number. worse, it always sends codes over SMS whereas telegram now tries to send codes to other devi- oh right, signal doesn't support multiple devices*

*though they have a security hole where you can just copy your desktop client's directory and launch it on another device and signal will have zero problem with that and won't even alert that connection is now coming from a different device. it will just send messages to this session, even though that session is shared by different devices now. at least telegram desktop has ability to set PIN to protect against that, which encrypts all your data.

@strypey

@brawaru it should be noted that telegram only allows using sms if you use an official mobile app, which means you can't sign up without downloading the app store/play market version. so no telegram for you if you use a featurephone or you have something like lineageos etc.

@brawaru
> it's the other way around, lol. signal and telegram both always required a phone number, but [details]

I appreciate the clarifications, but they're orthogonal to my point. Which is that speaking as a veteran of numerous direct action campaigns in the late 90s and noughties, both of these centralized chat silos smell suspiciously like honey to me.

This topic comes up a *lot*. I must finish that blog post laying out my take on it.

@strypey

To add to this, the 2027 Steel Dossier included intelligence that Telegram's encryption was compromised but that little tidbit was overshadowed by the Trump 'pee-pee tapes' accusations.

@drewfer
> the 2027 Steel Dossier included intelligence that Telegram's encryption was compromised

I believe Matthew covered that in the blog post I linked. Must check that...

@strypey just realized that I fat fingered 2027 instead of 2017. Apologies.

@drewfer
> just realized that I fat fingered 2027 instead of 2017

My brain must have autocorrected it, I didn't even notice : P

@strypey telegram is in f-droid and Debian, it reportedly has around 900M users. So most popular instant messaging app with a free software client application.

Me:
> I can't fathom why anyone uses it

@lindi2
> telegram is in f-droid and Debian, it reportedly has around 900M users. So most popular instant messaging app with a free software client application

See above.

@strypey

> * encryption doesn't work for groups, only 1:1, tick (like Signal)

Can you elaborate on what you mean by the '(like Signal)'?

(2014) https://signal.org/blog/private-groups/
(2020) https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1416.pdf

Private Group Messaging

One of the major features we introduced in the TextSecure v2 release was private group chat. We believe that group chat is an important feature for encrypted communications projects, so we wanted to try to summarize some of the existing work in this area, as well as how TextSecure’s group chat pr...

Signal Messenger
Thanks for the links @bengo. A lot of thought has been put into how private group chats on Signal might be encrypted, as those links indicate. But the last I heard they're still not encrypted by default in the Signal service. If my info is out-of-date, I'd appreciate a link where I can confirm that.

@strypey I think you might be confusing signal with telegram. telegram has some stuff that is not encrypted by default. signal is always encrypted and always has been, regardless of groups/1:1

https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007318911-How-do-I-know-my-communication-is-private

https://www.reddit.com/r/signal/comments/ohn71i/are_all_groups_encrypted_on_signal/

@bengo
> Signal is always encrypted and always has been, regardless of groups/1:1

The closest thing I can see at the first link is;

"... messages and calls cannot be accessed by us or other third parties because they are always end-to-end encrypted."

Please quote me the text I missed specifying that *groups* are encrypted.

The second link is a claim by a *deleted* user on dReddit. I don't believe what I read on toilet walls, and neither do I take anything said or web forums as gospel truth.

@strypey I find this pretty funny. "A Signal group is built on top of the private group system technology." https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007319331-Group-chats
which links to https://signal.org/blog/signal-private-group-system/
which links to the IACR paper from 2019 I linked to a month ago..

"Signal groups are built on top of the new private group system technology we previewed last year, which gives you a modern group chat experience while keeping your groups private"
https://signal.org/blog/new-groups/

If this stuff doesn't convince you, nothing I say will

Group chats

Signal provides  private groups (New and Legacy) for all platforms. insecure MMS groups on Android. What is a New Group? This is a Signal group that is built on top of the new private group syst...

@bengo
> If this stuff doesn't convince you, nothing I say will

What would convince me is a link to a page that contains both the words "groups" and "encrypted", not just one or the other. I'm confused as to why you think anyone ought to be convinced by anything less. Of the three links in your last post, one *one* does that;

https://signal.org/blog/signal-private-group-system/

Which just shows how inclined some people are to take positive claims about Signal on faith, while demanding robust sources for negative claims.

Technology Preview: Signal Private Group System

Groups are inherently social, and Signal is a social app. Whether you’re planning a surprise party, discussing last night’s book club meeting, exchanging photos with your family, or organizing something important, group messaging has always been a key feature of Signal. Signal provides private gr...

Signal Messenger

@rysiek Interestingly, I have reported to Lithuanian national broadcaster (LRT) false claim Telegram was supposedly "secure and private" communication app - the further coverage of Pavel Durov arrest did not contain such claims about the app anymore 

So it's also up to us to help our media understand tech better 

@gytisrepecka well it's up to the media to start doing their jobs right, I'd say.

But as your intervention shows – and thank you for doing it! – we have some influence we can use to push them in the right direction. 👍

@rysiek Problem is media produce content so quick they rely on news agencies and press releases - news mashups go out so quick without any editorial oversight or subject area expert review whatsoever 

I would probably not waste time on proprietary media, but helping out national broadcasters, if they are willing to accept any advice, is well worth 

@rysiek you’re got to wonder if this is a publicity stunt to get criminals to believe Telegram is secure so they can more easily be surveilled by law enforcement. After all, that’s what the FBI did with the fake criminal-friendly phone service Anom, and much earlier the NSA with CryptoAG. Durov now has French citizenship.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/23/24163389/joseph-cox-dark-wire-fbi-phone-startup-anom-criminals-secure-messaging-decoder-interview

How the FBI built its own smartphone company to hack the criminal underworld

Cybersecurity journalist Joseph Cox talks to Decoder about his new book Dark Wire and the story of Anom.

The Verge
Signal Is More Than Encrypted Messaging. Under Meredith Whittaker, It’s Out to Prove Surveillance Capitalism Wrong

On its 10th anniversary, Signal’s president wants to remind you that the world’s most secure communications platform is a nonprofit. It’s free. It doesn’t track you or serve you ads. It pays its engineers very well. And it’s a go-to app for hundreds of millions of people.

WIRED