Hacker News Reader

Comment by jiltedgen | Hacker News Reader

Why, in conversations about chat apps, does telegram get brought up so frequently as a private alternative? Is it not also mostly proprietary the same as whatsapp/messenger whatever?

Is it just a matter of a dislike for facebook?

View on HN

It's about a few things:

- If you have at least one alternative to Facebook installed, you lessen their network effect. People now have a choice how to talk to you. (I have another five messaging systems installed myself, but I will settle for everyone picking just their one favorite alternative to avoid a complete monopoly.)

- If you install a Facebook messenger, you know what they're going to do with your metadata. If you install Telegram, you have to be afraid that your data contents might somehow leak in the future. What's better: a definite moderate privacy invasion or a potential worse one? I have trouble answering that for myself, let alone advise others (when it's only between these two and only about privacy).

- Telegram has by far the best UX of any messenger I've ever used. Of course, this is helped by being unencumbered by any and all encryption problems by not having proper encryption, but it sure draws users.

> - If you install a Facebook messenger, you know what they're going to do with your metadata.

No that's false. Didn't you learn anything from the Cambridge Analytica scandal?

Apparently not, what should I have learned that you think I didn't? Because I'm not understanding what you're referring to (of course I know of the CA thing and that it used Facebook data, but that would mean we agree I think?).

I'd rate the Cambridge Analytica scandal about the same as the Panama Papers: the only surprise was that we actually caught them in the act for once.

The clients are open source, which provides better assurances around the E2E encryption than whatsapp.

Except who the hell even use E2EE on Telegram?

Fair enough, not me. But it's there and verified if you want it.

Yeah it's here, but it doesn't sync between devices, there is no group chat support, etc. While marketing trying to sell Telegram as good privacy by default.

Some people use secrets chats if you want to hide something, they have the auto destruction of messages and chat way before it was implemented on WhatsApp.

You can keep it for personal chats. Also it has no contents revewled in notifications so apps with notification access cancan't steal it.

Note that telegram chats are not e2e encrypted by default.

And that it uses a proprietary encryption protocol, "MTProto", which has been repeatedly found to have vulnerabilities, like every other self-made encryption scheme.

Now add in the fact that it's a UAE company...

You're misusing the term proprietary here.

Telegram's protocol might be custom, but it's well described and there are open source client implementations.

Whatsapp is totally closed and non-interoperable.

And whatsapp is made by an US company, that's an assurance for data collection and massive surveillance.

> which has been repeatedly found to have vulnerabilities

No, it has not. Recent research by seasoned encryption experts found minor bugs in realization, mostly around messages order. @see https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2021/07/fou...

Do not roll your own crypto is meant for software engineers, not a team of professional cryptologists.

> Now add in the fact that it's a UAE company

I don't know why you keep saying that. They have servers and offices distributed in different countries, but IIRC most of the team including the founder and CEO are Russian. They say the distribution is so that no single jurisdiction can force them to do too much.

As if we are supposed to trust US or any other countries. Lol

Telegram server is proprietary, clients are open source. And the protocol is open, and it is quite robust despite being garden variety cryptography.

It probably is, but it is also more convenient than whatsapp (or any other messenger for that matter) in many ways.

Very good point. There's a free-ish client on F-Droid (probably even official), but it's still a proprietary and centralized service. I would not really consider it better than the other proprietary options, but for whatever reason some tech people are into telegram.

Back in high school when I started using telegram (2010ish?), I started using it because it wasn’t Whatsapp, it wasn’t owned by Facebook, and it had a really great UI. And I didn’t really understand the encryption implications.

Today I really wish it had full encryption. It says something about the developers that they’ve avoided default E2E for a full decade or more now. I’m trying to use signal more. But I also have years and years of telegram group chats to migrate…

> It says something about the developers that they’ve avoided default E2E for a full decade or more now.

It's by design: https://telegra.ph/Why-Isnt-Telegram-End-to-End-Encrypted-by...

As others have mentioned the many open source clients, I would add that they are quite ahead in reproducible builds as well.

PR. And not being owned by FB.

Telegram actually do have ecosystem of open source clients, but on other side E2EE is opt-in that no one uses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com