Blog post by crypto professor Matthew Green, discussing what Telegram does (I wasn’t familiar with it) and criticizing its cryptography. He says Telegram by default is not end-to-end encrypted. It does have an end-to-end “secret chat” feature, but it’s a nuisance to activate and only works for two-person chats (not groups) where both people are online when the chat starts.

It still isn’t clear to me why Telegram’s founder was arrested. Green expresses some concern over that but doesn’t give any details that weren’t in the headlines.

  • kboy101222@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Are there any programs that can do e2e in a group chat? My limited knowledge of e2e and encryption makes me think that’d be extremely difficult and even clunkier

    • kugmo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Element (really any Matrix client that supports e2ee) but rooms with hundreds I’d people and having encryption enabled is going to to have lots of messages with key exchange errors.

    • solrize@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Group chat is a tricky problem and the modern crypto group (moderncrypto.org) talked about it at great length a few years back. I don’t know whether any software exists that incorporates all those ideas, but that’s mostly because I haven’t really been looking for it.

    • Daemon Silverstein@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      PGP/GPG encryption. It works with any IM, social network, anything (at least if the platform/program/app/medium allows for sufficiently lengthy messages so to carry the encrypted payload). There are some IMs that bring PGP/GPG natively, as well as extensions for existing IMs that also adds PGP/GPG feature, but PGP/GPG doesn’t need to be native to the app to convey encrypted messages, it’s a base64 text. It’s really an E2EE.

    • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Messages app by Apple. Not extremely difficult, but has its trade offs, and easier when all devices share a CA.

          • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Doesn’t the concept of using a CA (which are generally also central authorities) go against the idea of E2EE that only required to (or more) endpoints or am I missing something? Signal group messages (and the protocol/concept behind it) work without a CA. I think I’m missing something, can you connect the dots for me?

            • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              The CA is purely a way to provide validation that the endpoints being connected are who they say they are; the actual signing certificates are still private. Apple uses a central directory; Signal depends on certificates linked to one way hashes of phone numbers.