Many in the crypto and privacy community mistakenly trust Telegram because it’s “end to end encrypted”, but there are huge issues including not hiding the metadata, censorship, centralization, and phone numbers.
Send this video to your friend that asks why you won’t join:
https://video.simplifiedprivacy.com/why-telegram-sucks/
You must log in or register to comment.
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
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.47K Posts
- 58.8K Comments
- Modlog
The only thing Telegram has going for itself is that it’s Non-Meta and Non-Western.
Anyone who has a closer look at Telegram’s reputation knows that their privacy claims are dubious. If you want end to end encryption, even WhatsApp is better. But these things depend on your individual threat model.
Telegram can be E2E, no reason to switch to Meta’s app for it
You use Signal.
Yeah, end to end encryption in a closed source app can’t be proven outside of the company and the company can’t be held accountable by the public even if it gets a third party audit at some point because it can always just change the source.
Open source, client side, end to end encryption is the only serious standard.
open source can also change over time. The only time you can trust it is when it does have an independent third party audit and even then they have very specific language saying what they found and in what version.
This is true, but those changes are visible. It’s much harder to get away with back dooring something that’s open source. At the very least, you need to be clever about it so as to not draw suspicion to your changes. I’m reminded of this story: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/30/22410164/linux-kernel-university-of-minnesota-banned-open-source