Hi :) I know that Telegram is not save and not a good messenger if you are a privacy-geek. Sadly some parts of my family still think so. I brougth up the arguments, that they are cooperating with Russia, that they or closed-source on the server-side and that e2ee is not on by default and only available for 1-on-1 chats.

My question now is, if you gals and guys might have some other arguments or sources I could use.

I don’t want to convince anyone to switch away from Telegram (because I am no missionary :D) I just want people to understand the risks of using Telegram.

  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    How about: Signal is better? Though, they recently were caught with some unencrypted shit on the desktop client.

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        Lemmy thread and link.

        Basically, anyone who can read your home directory could decrypt your Signal database. That’s about typical of traditional desktop applications, but questionable for security-oriented software. Mac OS and (sometimes) Linux have more robust credential management options, and Signal signaled (yes, pun intended) its intent to adopt them.

        • Chaotic Cookie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          4 months ago

          I feel that if someone can read your home directory, signal isn’t your worst worry. However, it’s still an issue and I’m glad they’re going to move to better security.

    • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Caught? It was like kinda obvious. You could always locate your Signal folder where everything is downloaded and just see all pictures…

      I ignored this flaw as I kept my PC Luks encrypted, but a friend on Windows might not, where everyone with physical access could read everything.

      So, yeah. I also dislike the idea that its not encrypted in some sort of way.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      The messages in the desktop client aren’t encrypted. However, someone would need access to your machine to get them

      • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Also, if the data were encrypted, the encryption key would have been on the Computer anyway, but yes it could have been better protected.