Privacy

39018 readers

734 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

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

307

Recent commits suggest Signal is preparing a paid subscription for backups. (github.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

85 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago (16 children)

I don't mind paying a fair price, for a service, so they should go for it. I use both Signal and Telegram, and I would pay for Telegram too, if the price was more fair...

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Don't use Telegram, let alone pay for it. So many red flags with Telegram.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Feel free to list them - with evidence and not just prejudice...?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No end-to-end encryption by default, you have to explicitly start a secret chat. That means that instead of it all being encrypted noise, secret chats stand out.
Servers are not open source (last time I checked). Why not? Seriously, why not?
Admittedly, not much of an issue any more, but in the beginning they had horrible security (so did WhatsApp until Facebook threw some competent engineers at the problem)

[+] [email protected] -7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There's end-to-end encryption. It's fine that you can chose what needs to be private, and what doesn't need to be.

There could be several reasons as to why the servers are not OS. Why do you need that part to be OS? Seriously, why?

Oh, so your problem with Telegram is, that it had some issues in the past, just like EVERY other app in the beginning? Nice one. :-)

So, let's summarize.

You lie, and say that there's no end-to-end encryption when there is.
It would be preferable to have OS servers, but it's not a major issue, since everything else is.
You have an issue with something in "Back to the Future"... Which is no longer an issue.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Woot?! (not op),

He said "no e2e by default" which is true. Straw man/missrepresentation
You post on the fediverse, which is decentral - why shouldn't you want this for telegram too? Open source server would allow to check / trust code, host your own, be more resilient against central attacks/malicious intend. Also you just waved it away saying it is not a biggy - maybe to you.
Last time I checked telegram still has major trust issues for me. No way to know how much governments are involved, code is not independently checked for security (happy to be proven wrong on especially the last one)

Its totally fine that you like telegram, but you can do that while acknowledging others preferences

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago

it's not true. Default calls are encrypted.
I have not said anything about what I want for Telegram. Are you trying to make a straw man here? Not that you want to interject yourself into this debate - then tell me, what is the big problem with the serverside not being OS? I did write it would be optimal, but what is the big issue for you? Try to answer without making another straw man about something I didn't say... ;-)
I don't care about your trust issues. Go deal with them...

So far, don't you think that you really would know, if government was involved in any way that didn't involve crime fighting? Do you prefer an app, where crime roam free? Is that your issue? That it doesn't?

AFAIK it's you and two others, who don't acknowledge my preferences... So please consider following your own advice!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You lie, and say that there’s no end-to-end encryption when there is

That is not what I said. Please take a deep breath, maybe go outside for a minute, and read my reply again.

[+] [email protected] -6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

First of all, you injected yourself in my debate with another person. You do it by answering for that person, which mean, you lie by default, since you don't know that persons answers. Then you say there are no end-to-end encryption by default, but that depends on what you use it for. Calls are encrypted by default.

But nice to know that you really didn't have any serious red flags. Now it would be nice to hear from the person I was originally debating with...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah sorry. I thought you were here on lemmy for an open discussion and polite, good-faith arguments, not just trolling and name-calling. My bad.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So, where did I use name-calling?

An open discussion is always welcome. Someone hijacking a conversation is not. So yeah... your bad.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sorry, I don't talk to liars.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Being one yourself, that would make sense. You'd have a strange conversation.

load more comments (14 replies)