WhatsApp displays 404 not found when I send a link to Signal | Hacker News Reader

WhatsApp displays 404 not found when I send a link to Signal

dropbox.com

167 pointsMKais41 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25720423

It looks like the signal.org website always sends back a gzipped response even when the client doesn't accept gzip. Maybe that's the issue. I'm personally not having any problems on iOS.

  curl -H "Accept-Encoding: identity" -v https://signal.org/
  ...
  < content-encoding: gzip

Related: Pavel Durov (Telegram founder, CEO) claims that Facebook (or others...) is astroturfing and editing wikipedia to promote WhatsApp.

You can read his full post, with citations, on his Telegram channel: https://t.me/PavelDurovs/99

It claims that Telegram has always been encrypted and whatsapp originally wasn't.

There is no way to interpret that to make it true. Telegram chats are not e2e encrypted by default. They're encrypted between the server and the client, but whatsapp chats were also even before they implemented e2e encryption everywhere.

How do you know whatsapp is e2e encrypted and there is no mitm going?

The same way I know that signal is - trust in the various groups that have incentives to set up encryption correctly and to break it if set up incorrectly.

Yeah Durov does that

He also claims that Telegram is not server-side open source, because then Iran and China could run their own versions of Telegram and he doesn't want that.

As much as I like Telegram because of its GUI and features, Durov often says half-truths like that. (And do not forget all the TON stuff.)

what TON stuff?

Telegram Open Network. I drscribed the idea in another comment above.

Please don’t end a comment with an aside that references non-ubiquitous events using a non-ubiquitous abbreviation. I have absolutely no idea what that’s referring to.

TON - Telegram Open Network. Blockchain-based technologies that also included the cryptocurrency called Gram, but is way more than just the cryptomoney. I highly recommend reading the "technical paper" if you have time and technical understanding. It's absolutely fascinating (was written by Pavel's genious brother)!

Durov decided to develop it and got billions of euros for that. It had some delays, but otherwise looked ready.

But then USA came in and said using jaw-dropping argumentation and forbid Telegram from running it ANYWHERE in the world!.. So Durov had to officially abandon the project.

Currently TON is still being developed by non-Telegram teams.

This is a very limited (not honest) interpretation of what he said though.

This is what Durov actually said: https://t.me/durovschat/515221

I hate how Telegram runs around telling everyone they are "encrypted". They pray on people who don't know the intricate details of encryption. Which is, understandably, most people. This post I'm making right now is exactly as encrypted as a Telegram chat.

> They pray on people

We appreciate the prayers (pray), but not the predation (prey). (I have seen the phrase "pray on" used in a religious setting to refer to physically touching someone while praying for them.)

But it's true. Original versions of WhatsApp had no encryption at all, even in transit. https://web.archive.org/web/20110523235136/http://www.yourda...

Interesting. Still don't think this is an honest way of describing it:

>WhatsApp, on the other hand, had zero encryption for a few years, and then adopted an encryption protocol funded by the US Government

How is it not honest if it is 100% factually correct?

If the beginning of that sentence is referring to 2011, then there's a five year gap until full e2e was implemented that the comment pretends never existed.

Your interpretation (that you claim make Durov's statement not fully honest) is doing actually the exact opposite. It shows that if anything, Durov didn't write information, that - if written - would have shown Whatsapp in even worse light.

Knowing that whatsapp implemented e2e in 2016, the direct implication of his statement is that there was no encryption prior to that.

Yes. Durov was speaking about "few years", but it turned out to be 5. So if anything he was downplaying the competitor's issue, not the opposite.

So coming back to the original claim of yours: how is what Durov said is not factual and honest?

I answered that in the comment you replied to.

He implies there was no encryption during those five years, when in fact WhatApp had exactly the same level of encryption during that time as Telegram has by default.

You should take everything Pavel Durov says with an extreme amount of salt. To say his statements are misleading is often an understatement.

You gave a link to Durov's fake account.

Here is the official one. http://t.me/durov

I recommend reading his last post.

In China WeChat (controlled by Tencent) refuses to open links to Taobao (controlled by Alibaba), giving some fake technical failure message. It has been like this for half a decade.

That's what Taobao did to WeChat before its rapid user growth.

I wonder how many users they lost in recent days.

They have already relented for EU countries already after I got a message I will have to accept their new terms. Probably still moving to Signal.

Well, they haven't really relented, you still have to sign the agreement saying they can use your data. It's just that they wheeled out a spokesperson to say 'but we really won't - honest, if you are in the EU'.

They didn't even say that. They said nothing changed for private messages based on the change of ToS. Overspecific denial.

Can you share the exact link here to let others ponder whether this is sabotage or human error?

It could have been a short downtime. So much drama.

Doesn't WhatsApp make these previews on the client?

You're saying whatsapp has a super simple vulnerability to expose peoples IPs?

Delicious

The requests come from a crawler they host, not from the client —- so not to simple.

At least it was, yes. Not sure how it is today. I don't use it anymore.

This is not happening on a Pixel 4a 5G in the U.S.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16n39frZkH3ue3Ptwq2-xwu2LE80...

I am not experiencing this.

Works for me: https://photos.app.goo.gl/LoUBPqQ4urwdf8QKA

WhatsApp version 2.20.206.24 running on MIUI Global 12.0.3 (Android 10)

It's ironic if you consider that WhatsApp's encrypted chat is based on the Signal protocol.

the link in question is http://www.signal.org/install the preview shows a 404 (may have always been the case, not sure)

Maybe because of the redirect to the app store?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com