177
Uniting for Internet Freedom: Tor Project & Tails Join Forces | Tor Project
(blog.torproject.org)
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
177 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
59378 readers
3617 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No? There's a pretty good reason every criminal used telegram. I've never seen any attempts at combatting anonymity much less censorship.
Likely TG got unbanned in Russia for cooperating with LEOs there, but while awful, that doesn't really matter if you're a westerner, even Ukrainian armed forces used it, and for the average substance enjoyer it was still much safer to use than any Five Eyes app due to its intentional highly decentralised complexity, and unlike Signal it actually works and is pleasant to use. Now they are straight up handing data over to British cops.
I thought Signal was the big one?
I have in my life met two people who used signal. They did it because I suggested it. They are both senior cybersec folks.
I mean... They disabled desktop registration, then disabled registration from any non-official client, then can randomly ban people who try to make their usage of the platform more private/anonymous... Then there is censorship, at least here. And I have heard of at least one case of cooperation with German LE, so it's not "untouchable" for Westerners too.
It was never safe with such an approach of "I can close my eyes and pretend the law doesn't apply to me" even in the West. If it was hostile to privacy and anonymity by design, it was a matter of time until it became wide open to Western LE too. The sheer amount of compromate it had on users was a ticking time bomb.
"Highly decentralized complexity" - what does that even apply to? That would apply to Matrix, XMPP, Simplex, especially Briar. Even Signal can technically be selfhosted (whether it is feasible is another question), in Telegram you can't have even that because the server is closed.
Huh? Worked for me.
Telegram literally only banned CSAM.
Source? Because they're pretty transparent about it and have only ever banned CSAM. If that's what you mean by "censorship" please KYS
Except that it was, and that's why people used it.
No it wasn't? It was literally the private anonymous messenger and that's why people used it.
No it wasn't, or they wouldn't have had to arrest Durov.
Yeah, but so is every good thing.
The subject matter at hand - Telegram. It was legally a complex mess of shell companies in weird jurisdictions. That's why the glowies couldn't touch it, the level of international cooperation it would require is far beyond the realistic means of any government. This is why they had to arrest Durov and offer him life in prison or to open up, there was nothing else they could do.
It would if any of these worked, or were used by anyone at all.
I don't want to self-host my criminal messenger, i live deep in five eyes shit.
I'm fine with that, as long as it's out of the glowies hands, but fella couldn't stay away from the hairy pits I guess
I know that it disabled desktop registration a few years ago. Under what conditions did you manage to register without a smartphone after that?
At the very least, I know instances of anti-war channels being censored. I don't know about CSAM, but I was thinking about drugs and dissidents.
Relying on one company's good will rather than it being physically unable to comply is not a good strategy for any serious safety.
Requiring an identifier that is tied to a government ID in many if not most jurisdictions. Requiring a mobile device and their semi-proprietary app to register. Banning people for "suspicious behavior" while suspicious means using tech that may help hide one's identity.
How so? In an actually safe solution, the content of the messages would have been useless without the keys stored only on the clients, unlike Telegram. Signal is like this. And in a better situation, the metadata wouldn't be a ticking time bomb either, as it would be scattered across multiple servers rather than packed neatly in one company's care.
That approach is pretty childish, as Telegram did have access to the keys. At the end, this is all theater if it relies on the good will of the company. An actually "untouchable system" with "decentralized complexity" would be the one where no one server operator can compromise the whole thing is they wanted so.
You can rent a VPS outside of Five Eyes, duh. Or choose one that someone else already hosts there. Having a choice is very important, and with Telegram you're just locked to a single provider.
...And most people are on things like Whatsapp or Facebook. Does that make them any good? It is fine to be there if you have to, but you wouldn't trust them with your safety.