A lot of privacy guides suggest avoiding Telegram. I understand that in its default mode there’s no E2EE (and no E2EE for groups at all). If people I know don’t wanttko use Signal, isn’t Telegram the lesser evil given it’s nicer privacy policy (than other popular ones)?

Say I use the FOSS version of it.

  • hiajen@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Despite you using the foss client of telegram there is no source for the server, signal has published it’s code.

  • dngray@lemmy.oneM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Probably another point is that the encryption for Matrix/Element has undergone multiple audits, one in 2016 and another one of their newer rust library. Whereas telegram just has not. There was this also a not too long ago. MTProto is also used nowhere else, whereas a lot of encryption has been influenced by the Double Ratchet which is well understood.

    The other thing worth noting is that Matrix is the foundation for other products which many governments use for secure communications.

  • PublicLewdness@burggit.moe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What keeps me from using Telegram is the server side is closed source; they have been known to work with governments; and been willing to censor content. There are enough better options that I have zero use for them.

  • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I find Telegram to be at least as trustworthy as Signal. Signal has a lot of red/orange flags that bother me. For example, Telegram is not based in the United States, whereas Signal is.

    • randomTingler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      An app designed by US company doesn’t represent anything related to security.

      The founder of telegram always complains that the FBI has access to signal, apple and other related chat apps.

      He suggests to use private chat, if it is confidential. The message transactions happens between peer to peer and it doesn’t go to the server. He was claiming all the privacy feature that you get from signal is the almost same as private chat. Signal stil uses the server.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Depends on your goals.

    For casual shit like sending files to yourself, bullshiting with memes, or stuff like that, the unknown factor of telegram doesn’t matter.

    But it is an unknown. We don’t know what their server code looks like. So you can’t trust that it isn’t doing things other than what it is supposed to.

    It’s a matter of preferences tbh.

      • woobalooba@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think that they published it as a response to the angry users. We wern’t that loud and signal had a reason to do so. That was when they worked on the cryptocurrency and the spam protection. In signals case it dosn’t matter much if the server is compromised since the important part happens on the client side. The server can only forward encrypted salad or not deliver a message. Or log the meta data of the messages. E2e will always be there, despite the server being compromised.

        • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What bothered me was that Signal fanbase was trashing Telegram for not publishing the server source, while Signal was doing this.