A lot of privacy guides suggest avoiding Telegram. I understand that in its default mode there’s no E2EE (and no E2EE for groups at all). If people I know don’t wanttko use Signal, isn’t Telegram the lesser evil given it’s nicer privacy policy (than other popular ones)?

Say I use the FOSS version of it.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Depends on your goals.

    For casual shit like sending files to yourself, bullshiting with memes, or stuff like that, the unknown factor of telegram doesn’t matter.

    But it is an unknown. We don’t know what their server code looks like. So you can’t trust that it isn’t doing things other than what it is supposed to.

    It’s a matter of preferences tbh.

      • woobalooba@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think that they published it as a response to the angry users. We wern’t that loud and signal had a reason to do so. That was when they worked on the cryptocurrency and the spam protection. In signals case it dosn’t matter much if the server is compromised since the important part happens on the client side. The server can only forward encrypted salad or not deliver a message. Or log the meta data of the messages. E2e will always be there, despite the server being compromised.

        • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What bothered me was that Signal fanbase was trashing Telegram for not publishing the server source, while Signal was doing this.