Any centralized communication network is by definition insecure (one point of failure).
Maybe try Tox.
Telegram copperating with Iran
It’s a project that has always put security first but made some compromises for usability — very different from Telegram which has put expansion and monetization first — and it was started by Moxie Marlinspike whose views and contributions are well-known.
With Signal, it is not a single point of failure. The Android, iOS, desktop apps all do end-to-end encryption. So a compromised server wouldn’t mean your messages are compromised.
The client would need to be compromised, and if the client is compromised, tox.chat is toast as well.
I meant DoS attack not encryption.
AFAIK all of these secure "apps" are NOT decentralized.
So if you can just block a certain IP, you'd have successfuly performed a DoS attack.
While I cannit defend (or attack, I'm no cryptographer) their crypto they seem to have a solution to this:
They say they don't store keys in the same datacenter or even jurisdiction as the customer data they protect.
According to them this means getting unencrypted data through a legal process would mean getting a warrant in two or more countries at once.
> According to them
I find it very hard trusting their word. And we know the company has the ability to read messages. How is telegram better from FB messenger?
> And we know the company has the ability to read messages.
I don’t think we actually know that.
In fact I think they have a system to keep data and keys apart and in different jurisdictions to prevent USA, Russia or anyone from being able to get access to it.
I am no cryptographer or legal expert though.
> How is telegram better from FB messenger?
This is a bit simpler: while Facebook messenger might be E2E encrypted I have good reason to believe that Facebook will datamine my metadata and sell it to however wants to pay.