Greetings!
A friend of mine wants to be more secure and private in light of recent events in the USA.
They originally told me they were going to use telegram, in which I explained how Telegram is considered compromised, and Signal is far more secure to use.
But they want more detailed explanations then what I provided verbally. Please help me explain things better to them! ✨
I am going to forward this thread to them, so they can see all your responses! And if you can, please cite!
Thank you! ✨
In my view, by far the biggest reason to switch is that Telegram doesn’t end-to-end encrypt chats by default.
Yes you can start encrypted chats specifically, but i’ll bet 99% of chats on telegram aren’t encrypted - meaning whoever has access to the telegram servers can read all the messages.
Signal claims to end-to-end encrypt all chats by default, and if you want to be 100% sure you can in theory read the source code and compile the app yourself. this means signal cannot read any of your messages, even if police asks them to or servers get seized. That’s a massive advantage in privacy.
Additionally, E2E chats don’t sync between devices (and iirc you can’t use them on desktop at all), and group chats can’t be encrypted at all.
Signal very recently made syncing between devices possible:
https://signal.org/blog/a-synchronized-start-for-linked-devices/
I was talking about Telegram. Syncing messages between devices has always been possible on Signal, just not the ones from before you connected the extra device.
So they have Carbons? Took them long enough.
I can’t speak about telegram, but signal is absolutely not secure to use. Its a US-based service (that must adhere to NSLs), and requires phone numbers (meaning your real identity in the US).
Matrix, XMPP, or SimpleX are all decentralized, and don’t require US hosting.
SimpleX is taking a lot of venture capital money which makes it just slightly suspect, imho. Those guys usually want a return of some kind on their investment. I simply don’t trust the motives of technocrats like Jack Dorsey.
The Matrix Foundation, on the other hand, seems a lot more democratic in governance and stewardship of the protocol.
Good projects require money. And SimpleX is still way better than Signal and Telegram, so imo it’s worth supporting and using
Thank you for your post!
I want you to know your effort and knowledge is appreciated, this will help future readers make better decisions.✨
But the situation stands that my friend and their friends are not as technologically literate as we are, and I would rather have them on something easy and secured than unsecured at all, especially from my experience with getting communities to use such decentralized platforms you mentioned.
Matrix is no more difficult to sign up on than signal, and they don’t forward your information to the US government.
I am not uneducated in this matter, I run Matrix instances and have dabbled in development of tools around it.
Perhaps our experience is different, but I have had great difficulty in helping groups on the ground to use Matrix.
Regardless of our agreement that Matrix is better than Signal, it should not cloud our judgement in at least reducing the harm that is Telegram.
In the future we can keep joining hands to work towards a better future, but for now I hope you can understand my perspective and choice.
Matrix is centralized around Matrix.org or servers they run tho. Since the protocol is a big data/metadata sync by design & medium–large-sized servers are expensive to run, almost all of metadata is with Matrix.org—of which was originally funded my Israeli intelligence & I wouldn’t be surprised if they were getting data out of it to this day.
Further, they’re hosted in Germany, so they must still follow German law and court requests.
How is setting up e2e on matrix these days?
On by default, and just works.
and requires phone numbers (meaning your real identity in the US).
This gets shared a lot as a major concern for all services requiring a phone number. It is definitely true that by definition, a phone number is linked to a person’s identity, but in the case of signal, no other information can be derived from it. When the US government requests data for that phone number from Signal, like they occasionally do, the only information Signal provides them with is whether they do have a signal account and when they registered it last and when they last signed in. How is that truly problematic? For all other services which require a phone number, you would have much more information which is where it is truly problematic, say social graph, text messages, media, locations, devices etc. But none of that is accessible by Signal. So literally the only thing signal can say is whether the person has an account, that’s about it. What’s the big deal about it? Clearly the US government already has your phone number because they need it to make the request for Signal, but they gain absolutely no other information.
You are right but
we like doing the wrong thing over and over again. And being surprised, each and every time, when it turns out to be wrong. Never picking up onto the repeating simple pattern.
1111111111111 what’s the next number … errrr Signal! That’s it you got it. Good job.
Embrace the idiocracy!
This is why Telegram is awesome.
Eventually you will come around and realize how hopeless humanity is and embrace that it is well beyond hope.
And then you will have a larger network and enjoy each and every one of them.
While there may be better options out there, from a purely security standpoint.
The real world, with non-tech people needs solutions that are easy, fast and as close to foolproof as possible.
I choose Signal, because my mum, my sisters and brothers (none of which are tech people) can all go to their app stores and install Signal, it works and it is easy. Signal is private BY DEFAULT, I don’t have to remind them to turn on security for each chat, there is voice and video chat for individuals and groups, I can use it to send files. It is really good. Secure communication is their primary goal.
I have been using Signal since it was called TextSecure and I only had one contact using it.
Yes it sucked when they dropped SMS support; but these days about 98% of my messaging goes through Signal. Any SMS is usually from my doctor/dentist/bank.
I never really trusted Telegram, too many compromises. Secure communication is not their primary goal.
All big 3, Signal Telegram SimpleX, are just go to app store install, and send invite to contacts. SimpleX gets framed as technical and dissuades new users from installing, while it’s just as easy as the other 2.
Maybe, but I have had all of my family on Signal for close to 9 years now. Inertia and the network effect is a big part of why platforms stay around.
It took me saying to my mum, that I would ONLY share pictures of her new grandson on Signal to get her to install it. Once mum was on board, the rest followed pretty quickly.
The thought of getting mum to install a new messaging app now, and she is nearly 10 years older. Well it isn’t worth the effort. My threat threat model is low enough, to choose the convenience/security slider at Signal.
As a side note, every month or two; another of my contacts shows up on Signal. I have around 50 contacts using Signal now, as I said before around 98% of my messaging is through Signal.
Hmmm the Signal users sure like it, will have to take off my tinfoil data hat and give it a try
I was sold on threats and coersion. Lets do more of that
The real world, with non-tech people needs solutions that are easy, fast and as close to foolproof as possible.
Nope. Grandma gets a smartphone
Meaning they are hopeless and it’s impossible for them to emulate a techie.
It’s a fools errand.
Just stop trying to pretend Grandma is something more than completely unimportant and forgettable and hopeless and more likely than not merely a pest.
I’m so tired of entertaining Grandmas.
There’s a lot of answers itt but heres a simpler one:
If you want to prevent people in power from having access to communications there are two methods employed, broadly speaking:
The first is to make a very secure, zero knowledge, zero trust, zero log system so that when the authorities come calling you can show them your empty hands and smirk.
Signal doesn’t actually do this, but they’re closer to this model than the second one I’m about to describe. Bear in mind they’re a us company so when the us authorities come to their door or authorities from some nation the us has a treaty with come to their door signal is legally required to comply and provide all the information they have.
The second is to simply not talk to the authorities. Telegram was closer to this model than signal, using a bunch of different servers in nations with wildly different extradition and information sharing mechanisms in order to make forcing them to comply with some order Byzantine to the point of not being worth it.
Eventually the powers that be got their shit together and put hands on telegrams owner so now they’re complying with all lawful orders and a comparison of the tech is how you’d pick one.
The technology behind the two doesn’t matter really but default telegram is less “secure” than default imessage (I was talking with someone about it so it’s on the old noggin’).
I really like this explanation. Not many are aware of how telegram was designed to make it as cumbersome for authorities as possible by splitting their data across different nations.
I won’t be popular in this thread, but I don’t fight this battle anymore. Telegram beats Signal in virtually every aspect of user experience. If a person is unlikely to be convinced that e2ee is worth taking all the UX hits, I don’t try anymore.
Does it though? I have used both and I vastly prefer my experience on signal. I don’t really engage with the like, “communities” aspect of telegram though so perhaps thats what I’m missing?
Nope, see my reply to sibling for a more complete example
I can’t see anyone else on this comment thread so I guess I must be defederated with whatever user you replied to
Telegrsm is not secure anymore. USA have all the keys of the encriptions of telegrsm.
citation?
I think whas this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8ZXDiQLH9I
Signal needs a phone number.
I don’t want to give them one. Also I don’t have one.
Oh my, that seems to eliminate Signal as an option.
Next?
Apparently Signal still requires it, though you no longer must reveal it to others.
Wired last year: Signal Finally Rolls Out Usernames, So You Can Keep Your Phone Number Private
Those features, which WIRED has tested, are designed to allow users to conceal their phone numbers as they communicate on the app and instead share a username as a less-sensitive method of connecting with one another.
Whittaker says that, for better or worse, a phone number remains a necessary requisite as the identifier Signal privately collects from its users.
Apparently I still don’t have one. Haven’t had a phone number for about a decade. No SMS spam, no “survey” calls; nothing.
Same with telegram though
With Signal, the key to encrypt your messages are on your device, and is never sent to the company.
Signal, and anyone who hacks them, or governments that attack them, cannot read your messages. This has been proven in court.
With Telegram, the key to encrypt your messages are on their server.
Telegram, and anyone who hacks them, or governments that attack them, can read all of your messages. This has also been proven in court.
