The Tor Project and Tails have joined forces and merged operations to streamline operations, expand outreach, and strengthen both organizations' ability to protect people worldwide from surveillance and censorship.
I know that it disabled desktop registration a few years ago. Under what conditions did you manage to register without a smartphone after that?
Telegram literally only banned CSAM.
At the very least, I know instances of anti-war channels being censored. I don’t know about CSAM, but I was thinking about drugs and dissidents.
Except that it was, and that’s why people used it.
Relying on one company’s good will rather than it being physically unable to comply is not a good strategy for any serious safety.
No it wasn’t? It was literally the private anonymous messenger and that’s why people used it.
Requiring an identifier that is tied to a government ID in many if not most jurisdictions. Requiring a mobile device and their semi-proprietary app to register. Banning people for “suspicious behavior” while suspicious means using tech that may help hide one’s identity.
Yeah, but so is every good thing.
How so? In an actually safe solution, the content of the messages would have been useless without the keys stored only on the clients, unlike Telegram. Signal is like this. And in a better situation, the metadata wouldn’t be a ticking time bomb either, as it would be scattered across multiple servers rather than packed neatly in one company’s care.
The subject matter at hand - Telegram. It was legally a complex mess of shell companies in weird jurisdictions. That’s why the glowies couldn’t touch it, the level of international cooperation it would require is far beyond the realistic means of any government. This is why they had to arrest Durov and offer him life in prison or to open up, there was nothing else they could do.
That approach is pretty childish, as Telegram did have access to the keys. At the end, this is all theater if it relies on the good will of the company. An actually “untouchable system” with “decentralized complexity” would be the one where no one server operator can compromise the whole thing is they wanted so.
I don’t want to self-host my criminal messenger, i live deep in five eyes shit.
You can rent a VPS outside of Five Eyes, duh. Or choose one that someone else already hosts there. Having a choice is very important, and with Telegram you’re just locked to a single provider.
It would if any of these worked, or were used by anyone at all.
…And most people are on things like Whatsapp or Facebook. Does that make them any good? It is fine to be there if you have to, but you wouldn’t trust them with your safety.
I know that it disabled desktop registration a few years ago. Under what conditions did you manage to register without a smartphone after that?
At the very least, I know instances of anti-war channels being censored. I don’t know about CSAM, but I was thinking about drugs and dissidents.
Relying on one company’s good will rather than it being physically unable to comply is not a good strategy for any serious safety.
Requiring an identifier that is tied to a government ID in many if not most jurisdictions. Requiring a mobile device and their semi-proprietary app to register. Banning people for “suspicious behavior” while suspicious means using tech that may help hide one’s identity.
How so? In an actually safe solution, the content of the messages would have been useless without the keys stored only on the clients, unlike Telegram. Signal is like this. And in a better situation, the metadata wouldn’t be a ticking time bomb either, as it would be scattered across multiple servers rather than packed neatly in one company’s care.
That approach is pretty childish, as Telegram did have access to the keys. At the end, this is all theater if it relies on the good will of the company. An actually “untouchable system” with “decentralized complexity” would be the one where no one server operator can compromise the whole thing is they wanted so.
You can rent a VPS outside of Five Eyes, duh. Or choose one that someone else already hosts there. Having a choice is very important, and with Telegram you’re just locked to a single provider.
…And most people are on things like Whatsapp or Facebook. Does that make them any good? It is fine to be there if you have to, but you wouldn’t trust them with your safety.