arisuchan    [ tech / cult / art ]   [ λ / Δ ]   [ psy ]   [ ru ]   [ random ]   [ meta ]   [ all ]    info / stickers     temporarily disabledtemporarily disabled

/x/ - paranoia

just because you're paranoid don't mean they're not after you.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment

formatting options

File
Password (For file deletion.)

Help me fix this shit. https://archive.arisuchan.jp/q/res/2703.html#2703

Kalyx ######


File: 1559500652895.png (5.8 KB, 398x391, proxy.duckduckgo.com.png)

 No.794

By embracing the process of "de-googling myself", I'm also starting to be more suspicious about all the other apps I use on a daily-basis.
One of these is Telegram.
By reading around the Web, my suspicion is rising considerably, and I'm starting to wonder if I should actually get rid of it from my device.
A lot of people, Snowden included ofc, seem to consider it even less safe than WhatsApp and that's quite shocking, for me at least.
Can we really trust ANY of those applications?
How do we really know if services like Signal or Wire are actually safer than everything else?
What's the alternative to all of this?
Using old dumbphones or payphones?
Or maybe homing pigeons asd.

 No.795

no. Signal is infinitely better.

 No.797

You should switch to Matrix instead.

 No.799

it's all that we have and all that we need

 No.800

The universal opinion that I've encountered seems to be complete disagreement over which chat/messenger is the best tool to use based on various constraints. You just saw this happen in this thread with the 3 replies above me all recommending different things.

Note the one thing they agree on though, despite the many disparate recommendations. They all think telegram is soykaf. Which is true, don't use telegram, use literally any other thing.

 No.805

>>794
>Is Telegram secure?
You might as well use Skype.

 No.806

>>794
To use
Wire
Signal
Email + PGP
XMPP + OTR/OMEMO
Matrix
Ricochet

To avoid
Whatsapp
Skype
Vibre
Telegram
LINE
Facebook Messenger

 No.807

>>806
You forgot Tox.

 No.814

>>807
True.

If you want to get friends on a secure platform don't make Signal your first choice. It's centralized and has acted dubiously in the past.>>807

 No.817

Telegram has various problems. The main 2 are that a normal chat with a person is not encrypted, you have to use the 'secure' chat feature (why it's not standard is beyond me).

the 2nd is that Telegram made their own encryption standard without any serious cryptographers involved which should raise red flags. Then they're very secret about how it works and don't follow Kerckhoffs's principle.

I use Telegram for group chats but I use it the same way I use Twitter. I assume that everything I post there is public knowledge.

for secure communication I would recommend Wire or Signal.

 No.819

>>817
>The main 2 are that a normal chat with a person is not encrypted, you have to use the 'secure' chat feature (why it's not standard is beyond me).

Don't forget about not being able to use E2EE in Telegram desktop chats at all, for a BS local-storage reason that I don't buy whatsoever. If Wire can manage to do it, others can manage to do it too.

I think it really says something about Telegram's owners and developers when they have even worse default privacy than Facebook-owned Whatsapp. Though admittedly I am making an assumption about Whatsapp lacking backdoors, which is by no means certain.

 No.820

>>806
>>807
IRC doesn't get enough love.

 No.821

>>814
signal is the only one where I sometimes meet people in meatspace who already use it. So it's the one I recommend because the network effect is a big deal, and the point is to get normal people using secure comms not necessarily to plan terrorist actions.

 No.824

>>820
I like IRC, but it's unencrypted and all goes threw a central server which can read your messages.

 No.826

>>824
IRC is my canonical example of a protocol that is fundamentally unsalvageable. Just like classic SMTP, it makes horribly outdated assumptions about trust. Retrofitted security improvements come at the cost of buggy, flaky bolted-on code that doesn't really solve the underlying issues.

 No.831

>>826
>unsalvageable
I like your definition. Oddly resilient. Take out the odd part and it'd make sense to the techo hippies. Or leave as it and let it to the punks.

 No.841

>>831
It would be fine if tor wasn't derezzed, but nearly across the board tor/SSL are all derezzed or improperly configured. Done right it is great, done poorly it is just all garbage.

 No.854


 No.864

>>854
I'd love to get an account but I have no one who can vouch for me ;_;

 No.987

>>797
This tbh

 No.1005

It is not "that secure". However it heavily depends on what do you need messenger for. Do you want to communicate with your rl-acquaintances or cypherfreaks?



[Return] [Go to top] [ Catalog ] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]