this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
728 points (98.5% liked)

Privacy

46649 readers
1502 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“Telegram is not a private messenger. There’s nothing private about it. It’s the opposite. It’s a cloud messenger where every message you’ve ever sent or received is in plain text in a database that Telegram the organization controls and has access to it”

“It’s like a Russian oligarch starting an unencrypted version of WhatsApp, a pixel for pixel clone of WhatsApp. That should be kind of a difficult brand to operate. Somehow, they’ve done a really amazing job of convincing the whole world that this is an encrypted messaging app and that the founder is some kind of Russian dissident, even though he goes there once a month, the whole team lives in Russia, and their families are there.”

" What happened in France is they just chose not to respond to the subpoena. So that’s in violation of the law. And, he gets arrested in France, right? And everyone’s like, oh, France. But I think the key point is they have the data, like they can respond to the subpoenas where as Signal, for instance, doesn’t have access to the data and couldn’t respond to that same request.  To me it’s very obvious that Russia would’ve had a much less polite version of that conversation with Pavel Durov and the telegram team before this moment"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 7 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Which is true of open source unless you read the code and can verify nothing nefarious exists

Not at all. Not everyone needs to audit open source, only a few interested experts do. Most importantly, auditing is possible because its out in the open.

The just trust me model of signal means its impossible to audit, unless they give us their centralized database and server code.

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world -2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

If you are not auditing the source code, you are trusting those that are.

[–] zo0@programming.dev 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I not sure what you are trying to argue.

Even if you audit the code yourself, you still need to trust your OS, you need to trust the hardware the OS is running on, and you need to trust the proprietary drivers of each component in that hardware. Then at that point you gotta trust the person who sold you the hardware hasn't modified it.

Ok and?

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

There's a difference between trusting something written for general purpose use not to have harmful code vs. something written specifically for communications people want to keep private that would therefore be a target.

So either I felt I was making a valid point for consideration that I thought was valuable to make, or I'm a troll wasting everyone's time.

I know what I am. And I'm starting not to care what you or others think. Go blindly and trust whatever you want, it's no skin off my back. Frankly, I use Telegram because none of my comms are particularly sensitive, and I have no problem with that. I'd rather my private conversatiosn not be actively posted somewhere, but in the case of a breach, it wouldn't be the end of my world. So I've no problem trusting Telegram thus far, personally, in my case.

Anyway, have a nice time. Understand my point or don't.

[–] zo0@programming.dev 1 points 3 hours ago

I apologize if my comment came off as an attack, that was not my intention.

I appreciate you putting in the effort to bring up a concern, but I still don't get it.

Hope you enjoy your weekend