Privacy

32103 readers

559 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

Arguments why Telegram is not a good idea for anyone (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by andylicious1337@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hi :) I know that Telegram is not save and not a good messenger if you are a privacy-geek. Sadly some parts of my family still think so. I brougth up the arguments, that they are cooperating with Russia, that they or closed-source on the server-side and that e2ee is not on by default and only available for 1-on-1 chats.

My question now is, if you gals and guys might have some other arguments or sources I could use.

I don't want to convince anyone to switch away from Telegram (because I am no missionary :D) I just want people to understand the risks of using Telegram.

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

[–] yo_scottie_oh@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Sauce? I tried searching and couldn’t find anything (at least not on the first page of results). Thanks.

[–] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 16 points 2 months ago

i think they mean that signal on desktop does not encrypt their content at rest, which is acknowledged and not an issue they are intending on addressing.

But it seems to have recently changed? I'm learning thus as I wanted to find a source.

Source: https://candid.technology/signal-encryption-key-flaw-desktop-app-fixed/

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Lemmy thread and link.

Basically, anyone who can read your home directory could decrypt your Signal database. That's about typical of traditional desktop applications, but questionable for security-oriented software. Mac OS and (sometimes) Linux have more robust credential management options, and Signal signaled (yes, pun intended) its intent to adopt them.

[–] ChaoticCookie@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I feel that if someone can read your home directory, signal isn’t your worst worry. However, it’s still an issue and I’m glad they’re going to move to better security.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I'm inclined to agree, and said so in the linked thread.