this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59651 readers
2643 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. 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
[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (6 children)

As a kind of a weird bonus, activating end-to-end encryption in Telegram is oddly difficult for non-expert users to actually do.

No, it's not. It's very easy. In the bottom right corner there is a pencil button to compose a new message and right there it asks which tpye of chat to start. Secret chat is the second topmost option after group chat. Really not hidden or complicated at all.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Encryption is part of defense strategy, otherwise it's like a steel door in a house with wall panels made of paper.

That strategy involves all communications being encrypted. Otherwise rubber hose cryptanalysis becomes practical.

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.org 0 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Why would it even be an option to have a non-encryted chat if the app can do encrypted?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] curry@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

My man, have you ever worked in tech support? I admire your optimism.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (7 children)

That's my day job and I'm good at it. People understand when I explain three clicks.

[–] curry@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Fair enough. I've met both good and bad users.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 0 points 3 months ago

It is not easy, as it's not even possible on desktop.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It’s three clicks. And it opens a separate chat from the existing one. It’s obscure enough that you could say the UX deprioritizes (which at best is not an actively malicious design choice) usage of end-to-end encryption.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Anything harder than usual in the same application means it won't usually be used.

And encryption is about collective immunity. So everything should be encrypted.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It’s three clicks.

So it's only three clicks, ergo easy.

And it opens a separate chat from the existing one.

I don't see the problem. The secret one has the lock icon to clearly mark it. There's no way one would accidentally pick the wrong chat. Delete the old, unencrypted one to be sure.

It’s obscure enough that you could say the UX deprioritizes (which at best is not an actively malicious design choice) usage of end-to-end encryption.

I agreed in another comment that there should be an "encrypted by default" option somewhere. I'm not claiming that it's perfect but the claim in the blog that it's super complicated is just not true. At least calls are P2P-encrypted by default.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ah good point, gotta delete the old unencrypted chat too to avoid confusion. That’s definitely more than just 3 clicks.

[–] PhreakyByNature@feddit.uk 0 points 3 months ago

Yeah I mean if you started one. If you went in with a secret chat in the first place then it wouldn't be an issue. And so it's one extra click vs. starting a normal chat. I hope it hasn't inconvenienced you more than it's taken for all these replies.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you’re talking to 30 people, it’s 90 clicks. It might be 3 clicks if you know where to look, but end of the day, even if you know where to find it, that’s still that many clicks times how many people you chat with. It’s not ideal. I wouldn’t say it’s complicated sure, but it’s not easy.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you’re talking to 30 people, it’s 90 clicks.

Uh, so? A "compose message" button is the approach many communication apps use, including e-mail. Don't get me started how many clicks it is to GPG-encrypt e-mails...

It’s not ideal.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself that I agree on that part. You act as I would disagree. I don't. It could be better but it's also not a complicated nightmare as the blog author makes it out to be.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Right. But it’s also not exactly “easy” which is what you’re saying it is.

If easy was a sliding scale. Easy would be enabled by default. Hard would be making it obscure and hard to find. I would say it’s definitely closer to the harder to find side. But that’s just me. But 3 clicks, and having to switch chats and maybe delete the old one to avoid confusion, none of that is easy.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (6 children)

It should be a setting to always use encrypted chat, and it should probably prompt you when you first login.

Better yet, don't have an option to not have encrypted chats. I don't see a reason to not have everything E2EE all the time.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

It should be a setting to always use encrypted chat, and it should probably prompt you when you first login.

I don't disagree but the claim that you quoted was that it's complicated to initiate and as I explained it's not. Also secret chats stay in the messages list, so you can go back to an initiated secret chat and pick up there without any additional fiddling.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (13 children)

If you have to enable it every time, it's complicated enough that most people won't bother. Maybe they'll do it once or twice out of novelty, but it's not going to become a habit.

I only consider something "encrypted" if it's actually encrypted by default, or at least prompts to enable it permanently on first launch. Otherwise, it's not an "encrypted" chat, it just has the option to have some chats encrypted.

[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

More steps required to perform something is very squarely within the definition of complicated, no matter how straightforward those steps are.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] brrt@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago

Is it more complicated to achieve than in other e2ee messengers? Yes, thus saying it is complicated is justified.

[–] 30p87@feddit.org 0 points 3 months ago

But then you couldn't get that juicy user and conversation data.

[–] oktoberpaard@feddit.nl 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They’ve implemented it in such a way that you only have access to an encrypted chat on a single device, so no syncing between devices. Syncing E2EE chats across devices is more difficult to pull off, but it’s definitely possible and other services do that by default.

[–] pressanykeynow@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Syncing E2EE chats across devices is more difficult to pull off, but it’s definitely possible and other services do that by default.

That's because if you are able to get your private key on another device, then Google, Apple or Microsoft, and that means anyone, also have access to your private key. And you don't have e2ee, literally.

[–] oktoberpaard@feddit.nl 0 points 3 months ago

I would look into how Matrix handles this, for example. It involves unique device keys, device verification from a trusted device, and cross-signing. It’s not just some private key that’s spread around to random new devices where you lose track of.

[–] pressanykeynow@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't see a reason to not have everything E2EE all the time.

You probably didn't ever meet non-IT person(or most of the IT people). To use e2ee means you need to keep your private key close and safe. 99.999% people can't do that. So when they lost their key their conversation history is gone and it's your fault not theirs.

Signal does this by having your data be unencrypted at rest on your device, and I think that's a reasonable tradeoff because it protects the most import part: data in transit. Or you can be like Matrix and require/strongly encourage setting up multiple clients so you always have a fallback (e.g. desktop and phone). There are reasonable technical solutions to the problem of making an E2EE chat system.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago

As I understand it, public groups use server side encryption (so not robust), but private chats use e2e encryption that is client side. (More robust)

load more comments (1 replies)