Telegrsm is not secure anymore. USA have all the keys of the encriptions of telegrsm.
Asklemmy
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
It really depends on who your friend is, and who they are trying to defenf against.
If the US ( or Russian / Chinese) government really wants to access an internet-connected device, they can do it; what app you are using doesn't even matter. For example, most people use the default Google keyboard, which could be compromised.
If the concern is about local goons / employers / coworkers, then both Telegram and Signal are more than enough to stop them prying.
As for whether to use Signal or Telegram, Signal has end to end encryption enabled by default, while in Telegram you have to switch it on for each chat. On the other hand, Telegram has the best UI among messaging apps hands down.
Even if you switch to an offline keyboard, the new "ai" assistants in Windows, iOS, and Android? Can read your screen, microphone, and etc. I'm not really sure what you should use unless you use coded language. Even then, there's just too much information about you out there anyway. Best bet would to be have conversations in private away from any electronic devices or use something like tails.
Telegram is not end to end encrypted. Repeating it's not. Only private mode or something like that is.
You don't say? A cloud-service I can access from all devices plus API and bots is not e2e-encrypted with zero knowledge? I'm shocked. That's what "secret chat" is for. Literally.
They chose this way as the regular Joe and Jane don't care for privacy but for comfort. You can never ever have both. Nowhere.
I love tgram for it being so open. And e2e when I need it. I don't need privacy for when my smarthome sends me notifications about a light I left on or something ๐
Yep, and this allows for proper content moderation. Telegram can actually just find and report creeps to authorities
That too. Sadly the restrictiveness was badly abused. Noone really wonders but...that's why we can't have nice things.
Signal is USA government approved. Definitely don't trust it. Use Matrix.
This is unfortunately completely wrong, since you can learn from the homepage of matrix very own client Element, that its supported an trusted by a whole bunch of NATO Armys, including the US of course...
I don't mean by that you shouldnt use matrix, but arguing against signal with matrix is, in so many means, hilarious.
The arguable, but professional cryptographer soatok discribes from a mathematical/cryptographical point of view, what it needs to be a Signal competitor, where matrix (and others) dont catch up (unfortunately)
Used by a bunch of NATO armies isn't the same as promoted by or made by. It just means they trust Element not to share their secrets. And that blog post is without merit. The author discredits Matrix because it has support for unencrypted messaging. That's not a negative, it's just a nice feature for when it's appropriate. Whereas Signal's major drawback of requiring your government ID and that you only use their servers is actually grounds to discredit a platform. Your post is the crossed arms furry avatar equivalent of "I drew you as the soyjack". The article has no substance on the cryptographic integrity of Matrix, because there's nothing to criticise there.
it's open source
Sure. You can trust your own fork. Just don't use the official repos or their servers. The client isn't where the danger is.
There's a server side and it is secret ?
Your client talks to their server, their server talks to your friend's client. They don't accept third party apps. The server code is open source, not a secret. But that doesn't mean it isn't 99% the open source code, with a few privacy breaking changes. Or that the server software runs exactly as implied, but that that is moot since other software also runs on the same servers and intercepts the data.
Do you mean the servers aren't guaranteed to be running the exact code that's on github ?