I don't care much for the conspiracy nuts, but their ability to communicate with each other would surely have been terminated had they used WhatsApp.
It's fine to use WhatsApp to praise Obama, Merkel or anything else that is widely accepted in your society etc, but it's a terrible choice if you're on the shit list of the government.
Telegram has headquarters in the UK, a Five Eyes country. It's not unreasonable to assume that its unencrypted comms are monitored by Western gov agencies.
The non-E2EE comms are a joke and a liability of insane proportions.
That doesn't mean it can't be trivially hacked by a Western government. When you're using service that isn't using E2EE, you're just making two statements:
1. I don't trust Western companies 2. I haven't the foggiest wrt computer security or cryptography
If it were that easy to influence Whatsapp, India would not have a real problem with Whatsapp-mobilized lynching mobs.
Correct. It then goes on to - by default at least - upload everyones messages unencrypted to Google Cloud.
> the key difference to Telegram is it requires a phone number to use which instantly reveals your real identity to any snoop, snitch or government mole.
I usually defend Telegram but here I think you are wrong. Telegram also requires a phone number to sign up.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609.pdf
https://github.com/Loki-project
Seems to somehow be associated with the working group for Loki cryptocurrency, but not using blockchain to store messages or message contents, per FAQ.
https://docs.loki.network/LokiServices/Messenger/Session/
LokiNet reminds me of a self-funding P2P decentralized anonymous analog with massively more functionality to Google Jigsaw[1] project called Outline[2], which runs shadowsocks[3] on Digital Ocean droplets or your own Linux infra.
[1] Jigsaw, formerly Google Ideas: https://jigsaw.google.com
[2] Outline: https://getoutline.org
[3] Shadowsocks: https://shadowsocks.org
Some excerpts:
> TL;DR edition: an onion router with a tun interface for transporting ip packets anonymously between you and the internet and internally inside itself to other users.
> "What if I2P was made in the current year (2018)? What would be different?"
> In short we want to permit both anonymous exit and entry network level traffic between LLARP [aka LokiNet] enabled networks and the internet.
> In short, I want to take the "best parts" from Tor and I2P and make a new protocol suite.
Both Telegram and WhatsApp required a phone number last I checked, but you can install Telegram on a Desktop using a dumb phone for activation, you don't need to run the app.
> If it were that easy to influence Whatsapp, India would not have a real problem with Whatsapp-mobilized lynching mobs.
India has no jurisdiction over WhatsApp. They can ask Facebook nicely, but that's about it.
To stop communication you don't need to read WhatsApp-chats. You just disable the accounts that you want silenced. And you can't do that if you don't have control over the service (hence Western extremists use of Telegram).
If you're Russian and you want to talk about how free yourself of Putin, use WhatsApp or Signal, that is: an American provider. If you're American (or living in an American province) and you want to talk about how to free yourself of Washington, you use Telegram (or a Chinese messenger). Even if none of them can ever read your chats, they can a) use the meta data and b) disable your ability to communicate.
This also applies if you're a common criminal: US cops will have a much easier time getting meta data on your communication from WhatsApp than from Telegram. It's generally a good idea to know your threat model. Unless you're a Russian Oligarch or Ex-FSB, the FSB is not your problem. But your local domestic intelligence service may be, if you ever step out of line.
I don't think the average citizen has to worry about the FSB finding their kinks and blackmailing them. You don't kidnap poor people's children for ransom, you don't blackmail people who have no special powers.
Yeah, WA isn't anonymous. The problem is with Telegram storing all your private messages on their cloud, by hacking the server, just knowing your username the state level attacker learns everything about you, metadata, and content, and because there's no forward secrecy, it will date back basically forever unless you're constantly deleting logs, and even then you can only hope Telegram also erases their backup tapes.
>If you're American (or living in an American province) and you want to talk about how to free yourself of Washington, you use Telegram
That's just stupid, why would you want less secure architecture to criticize Americans? NSA can trivially hack Telegram servers to see your criticism if they want. You want E2EE for your dissident group no matter what, thus Signal will always remain a better choice.
By default, WhatsApp uploads all your messages to Google Cloud in clear.
That's actually not always true. Racism is widely accepted in many areas of American society, but, online platforms are beginning to make more of an effort to restrict outright hate (Twitter, for example).
LOL also I would like to point out the current President of the United States is the archetypal Obama-hater, so ... I dont know if it makes sense to talk about the government coming down on people who don't praise Obama. I would imagine President Trump also talks a lot of trash about Merkel, so, again, the current chief executive of this one particular government very publicy espouses the beliefs you claim that same government would crack down on.
I mean, there's also Fox news. Not praising Obama or Merkel. Very much active.
My point is, even if your point may be true, the examples you chose, when compared against some real-world data-points, undermine your own position.