this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
271 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

60305 readers
3727 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Spike is seen after arrest of telegram CEO Pavel Durov in France in august

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 2 points 9 hours ago

Good thing I never used telegram.

[–] bruhduh@lemmy.world 14 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

I don't get it, everyone complained that telegram didn't shared data with law enforcement, now everyone complains that telegram started sharing it

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 4 points 7 hours ago

These are 2 distinctly different groups of people.

[–] heavydust@sh.itjust.works 29 points 17 hours ago

everyone complained that telegram didn’t shared data

Who complained? All I remember is that their crypto and security sucks and we should stop using it.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 10 points 17 hours ago

My complaint wasn't sharing data with law enforcement. It was more about whether or not they should be moderating their platform and banning accounts that intentionally violate the policy. I don't necessarily have a problem with them sharing information with the police when it's warranted and there is a credible threat, because nobody should be using something to plan to bomb a restaurant or sports game. But the arguments that I have seen (and made) were pretty much "yeah, you shouldn't be allowed to plan to kill people on this platform with no moderation, especially when the chats aren't even encrypted".

Even back when the CEO got arrested most of Lemmy was crying foul on that and a lot of comments I saw got downvoted for siding with the 'police state ".

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago

Only thing I use it for is bots. If they want to know when someone is in my foyer, that’s fine.

[–] avieshek@lemmy.world 18 points 22 hours ago (3 children)
[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 17 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Better, but still not great, because a lot of metadata gets collected even if the conversations themselves do not. Might I suggest SimpleX instead?

[–] avieshek@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

I actually tried SimpleX because of this person..

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 7 hours ago

SimpleX gets a lot of things right. In particular:

  • no public identifiers
  • ability to chat anonymously
  • not dependent on centralized servers
  • multiple user profiles

My main concern for them is that they are backed by several investors (some VCs) with no concrete public plan as to how to pay them back.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 1 points 8 hours ago

Oh, nice. Whatever works.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

Im pretty sure matrix.org data has been and will be sharing data with law enforcement. Even if you use encryption, they collect loads of metadata. With smaller servers it depends on local jurisdiction i guess.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 7 hours ago

Of course they will. They only company that has actually ever refused, to my knowledge, is lavabit, and that's because they shut down their operations entirely when the gov demanded encryption keys due to Snowden.

The fact that such an enormous portion of users and groups are on the matrix.org server is a huge problem.

[–] derin@lemmy.beru.co 14 points 21 hours ago

You don't have to be "pretty sure", you can just read their law enforcement policies here.

They're not, nor have they ever been, a group of folk trying to hide from governments/LE: they're a legal company headquartered in the UK, and are bound by its laws.

Having said that, they're also historically against the UK Government's attempts at instilling things like encryption backdoors.

If you're still paranoid, host your own server; you can still use Element (the client hosted at Element.io) to access it.

[–] gregor@gregtech.eu 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Threema is also really good, and they're very close to the full release of the desktop app.

[–] Chrobin@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I really want to like it, but from a technical perspective, it just doesn't work well tbh.

[–] gregor@gregtech.eu 0 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

What's issue do you see with it? It's cryptographically secure and has been audited. The fact that it's centralized doesn't really matter.

[–] Chrobin@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

I meant from a user perspective. Sending images doesn't work half of the time, the search is completely useless if you have tens of thousands of messages etc. I use it every day btw.

[–] gregor@gregtech.eu 1 points 12 hours ago

If you'd like you can contact me on my Threema ID at 6CH24JJE so we can troubleshoot this in my group on Threema.

[–] gregor@gregtech.eu 1 points 12 hours ago

Your experience with threema is... weird? For me both of those things work perfectly. Much better than Element, for example.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

It's a shame, it was a good app but if you haven't bailed already now is as good a time as any.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 5 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

If you're using encryption you probably don't have much to worry about. The main problem is so many people don't bother to encrypt their chats and make the assumption that their chats are encrypted. Yes, I think the default should be encryption turned on. But I also think this is user error, so.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Aren't group chats unencrypted by design, with no option to encrypt? (I don't know, I don't use the app. Just something I vaguely recall somebody saying.)

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

No. You have to enable encryption individually. And it only works if everyone in the conversation has enabled encryption. But it is available.