Telegram communication app

I use it

>>55253081
i use it, could be better & could be worse

I use it.
At least it's tolerant of people who care about privacy unlike Signal.

>>55253081
Better than whatsapp, that's for sure. The problem is that normies can't be bothered to make the switch and as a result nobody uses it.

File: 1454397310214.jpg (106KB, 491x577px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 491x577px

>>55253081
Much better than whatsapp but in the technology world you need to reach critical mass (as microsoft says) if a competitor with closed technologies incompatible with everything else is in a dominant position. I definitely think that if most people uses telegram whatsapp wouldn't be even able to compete in it's current state.

using it for more than a year but only talk with my bae, i want to keep our history saved so we can read it in the future, bretty good app. i hope normies stay in whatsapp forever.

I like it, my work uses it. Much better then slack and free.

>>55253081
Stop shilling your Russian botnet, Durov.
Every sane person already uses Signal.

>>55253506
Both require a phone number to setup so both really could use some improvement.

>>55253081
I don't get it desu. Seems to be the same as WhatsApp.
I only use Kik.

File: 13124896_1745324489016977_7387343148796906884_n.jpg (36KB, 471x414px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 471x414px

>>55253081
DAILY REMINDER TELEGRAM RUNS BROKEN CRYPTO AND IS LITERALLY NO MORE SECURE THAN FB MESSENGER

>>55254217
Kik slut hoodrat

>>55254231
source or gtfo.

>>55254304
Literally Google "why is telegram bad".

>>55254184
actually german federal police botnet, the russkies kicked out durov cause he's an NSA shill

>>55254217
Only use Kik.
>16 yo confirmed

File: 1460660109798.jpg (86KB, 424x736px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 424x736px

>>55254304
http://m.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/23/homebrew_crypto_in_telegram_app/
Not to mention the messages aren't end-to-end encrypted unless you enable some weird non-default bullshit. Just like FB messenger, the messages are encrypted in transit, but sit in clear text on their servers, and can be collected/intercepted easily. It it literally literally the exact same level of encryption and security as FB.

>>55254318
>318 ▶
>>>55254304 (You)
>Literally Google "why is telegram bad".
I found this:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/23/homebrew_crypto_in_telegram_app/

The article is hilarious, Telegram is supposedly not secure yet no one has collected the $30,000 bounty yet...

>>55254304
http://www.cryptofails.com/post/70546720222/telegrams-cryptanalysis-contest
https://medium.com/@thegrugq/operational-telegram-cbbaadb9013a#.6xpe92hod

>>55254262
>>55254342
16 year olds and sluts also use Skype. Does that mean I should stop using Skype

>>55254394
>Every day, Paul sends a message to Nick containing an email address. You win the contest by sending an email to that address. You get a transcript of the network traffic coming in and out of Paul’s account. According to the faq, you can send arbitrary packets to the server, but you can’t intercept/modify the communication.

>The problem should be clear now: Telegram’s contest does not give the adversary enough power. The adversary doesn’t doesn’t get known plaintexts, can’t choose plaintexts, can’t choose ciphertexts, can’t modify network traffic, or anything like we covered in the previous sections. The contest barely fits into the known plaintext attack (KPA) model.

>If nobody wins the contest, it does not mean Telegram is secure. It means Telegram might be secure within the constraints of the contest. However, there are extremely weak systems that can survive a Telegram-style contest, so if nobody wins the contest, it won’t give us any more confidence in Telegram’s security.

http://www.cryptofails.com/post/70546720222/telegrams-cryptanalysis-contest

>>55254394
Facebook has a long-standing history of bug bounties too. This does not make facebook secure or trustworthy. Stop being dumb and find a real end-to-end encrypted messenger.

>>55253081
Made by russian KGB-ists

>>55253506
>>55254184
>>55254191
Also Signal needs Google Play Services to run on Android. They received a large fund from the US Government.

>>55254184
Signal for privacybo Google cucks

What about Ring?

>>55255481
>What about Ring?
https://ring.cx/

Oh look: it's another Telegram shill thread, courtesy of Pavel Durov's PR department. Fortunately, I have some pasta in the fridge from the last time.

http://gizmodo.com/why-you-should-stop-using-telegram-right-now-1782557415 - yes, Gizmodo, but it's legit.

tl;dr: Telegram sucks. For a phone messenger, today, use Signal instead, or even WhatsApp is better.

- Telegram doesn't even encrypt most things: https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/678065993587945472
- Telegram's MTProto 'secret chat' encryption is complete shit: https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/582245625103826944

Signal is a competently-designed, open-source (client AND server), end-to-end IND-CCA2 forward-secure phone messenger. Even Snowden recommends it: https://twitter.com/snowden/status/661313394906161152

Yes, Signal is imperfect. Here are the negatives:
- Requires phone. Not uncommon with phone messengers, but a pity for all those who'd like to finally kill, say, Skype.
- Signal can't protect communication metadata. That is an open research problem: Ricochet & Tor Messenger are best current solutions, but neither protect against global passive attackers (i.e. NSA) or are very good for phone batteries.
- Signal requires Google Cloud Messaging to wakelock phones on message delivery - unfortunately GCM is the only reliable supported wakelock on Android 6.x+.
- Signal has a desktop client, but that's a Google Chrome app that syncs to your phone. It works, but is far from ideal.

But it is the best we have right now.

The rest of this thread will, if history is any guide, probably be used to argue over the status of different desktop messengers, or userbases. Some cypherpunks are reaching for perfection here - but open research problems take time to solve. Until then, at least use something that doesn't suck.

oy vey

>>55253081
you literally just described whatsapp. why arent you using whatsapp.

>>55255685
Does Signal have a functional desktop client
no it does not
So it's fucking useless for me since I dont use my phone for anything other than browsing wikipedia.
At least Telegram does that right.

>>55258275
>I dont use my phone for anything other than browsing wikipedia
I'm sorry you have no life

>>55258275
it does if you use chrome

>>55253506
>phone number
>bots can see all your messages
do you wanna use it? fine, but don't fool yourself with this privacy bullshit. that's not even close to be secure.

>>55253614
too shitty for normies that care too much about coolness and to shitty for autists that care too much for privacy. that's its problem.
literally suitable for nobody.

>>55255685
What if I don't want to use Google play services on my phone?

>>55258990
I never said anything about security.

Signal is more secure than telegram, but if you run Google play services, which is required by Signal, privacy isn't more than a delusion.

I use it for the high quality furry porn stickers.

>>55258275
>>55258316
he raises a point and you attack him instead or addressing his argument? seriously?

>>55254379
t a guy who has never used telegram.
It's literally one tap to enable end to end encryption

>>55257926
botnet

>>55254335
why german fed botnet??

>>55262916
the germans are completely run by the jews now

>>55259238
use LibreSignal
https://fdroid.eutopia.cz/

>>55264705
Too bad it's abandoned...

Friendly reminder all your messages are saved in plaintext on their servers
inb4 some retard brings up the secret chats which literally no one uses

What about Bleep? P2P chat made by bittorrent