So they claim that Telegram cooperates... and then claim it does not cooperate. This is ridiculously vague.
Not to mention that the article doesn't clear up if it's data or metadata. Weird, poor journalism.
This might be a 'germanism'. The article says 'according to SPIEGEL information' which translates to 'according to undisclosed sources that gave us information'
> cooperating and not cooperating
Recently there was a huge controversy about Telegram in Germany about them not disclosing personal information about accounts spreading illegal information according to German law. There were claims about banning Telegram in Germany, but after pressuring the app stores, Telegram seems to have given in slightly. So they are still not disclosing as much information as the authorities want them to, but it seems like they started to cooperate a bit.
>data or metadata
'Nutzerdaten' in my understanding means mostly personal Data(real name, ip, address) but you are right, it is quite vague.
> on suspects in the areas of child abuse and terrorism. In the case of violations of other criminal offenses, it remains difficult for German investigators to obtain information from Telegram, according to security circles.
So Telegram is not giving free access or follows German law, but did help out in some specific cases.
Telegram claims otherwise and says it never responded to requests.
Yes, they are protecting their source(s), so you have to take them on faith. Der Spiegel has, however, an excellent reputation and good track record.
The operators of the messenger app Telegram have handed over user data to the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) in several cases - contrary to what has been publicly reported so far. According to SPIEGEL information, this involved data on suspects in the areas of child abuse and terrorism. In the case of violations of other criminal offences, it is still difficult for German investigators to obtain information from Telegram, according to security circles.
(Translated with www.DeepL.com)