• finley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    the article doesn’t explain what laws he’s accused of breaking. i’m not defending the person-- i find the lack of detail to be a bit odd.

    • True@lemy.lolOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The article mention that he is detained for investigation:

      Durov was traveling aboard his private jet, TF1 said on its website, adding he had been targeted by an arrest warrant in France as part of a preliminary police investigation.

      TF1 and BFM both said the investigation was focused on a lack of moderators on Telegram, and that police considered that this situation allowed criminal activity to go on undeterred on the messaging app.

      • NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Now we are detaining CEOs for potential criminal activity on their platforms, I expect to see many other CEOs behind bars before the end of the weekend

      • hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t like that at all.

        Hate on billionaires all you want, but a platform like this shouldn’t be forced to moderate. It runs completely counter to the USP of the app. It’s encrypted anonymous communication capabilities.

        • Elvith Ma'for@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s encrypted anonymous communication capabilities.

          Unless you enable it for every single chat (and IIRC only available for chats with only two persons, not group chats) there’s no encryption. Or did they change that? The only encryption that applies to most chats on that platform should be transport encryption via TLS.

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            That’s not correct. There’s user to server encryption, just not e2e. It’s less secure, sure, but given that they want to arrest the CEO over his compromise on keeping that actually private, it seems trustworthy enough, and has been over the years.

            • balsoft@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              There’s user to server encryption, just not e2e.

              That’s exactly what the comment said: The only encryption that applies to most chats on that platform should be transport encryption via TLS. It’s about the same level of encryption as Lemmy PMs.

              The fact that Telegram doesn’t cooperate with French authorities doesn’t mean that it doesn’t cooperate with other authorities or sell your data to the highest bidder. They have all the technical means for it.

              Don’t use a regular Telegram chat if your life depends on the messages being private. Use XMPP, Matrix with E2EE, or at the very least Signal. Heck, even WhatsApp is (reportedly) better, as it claims to provide E2EE and that’s been checked by some security professionals who have been given access to the source code. If you absolutely must use Telegram for something like that, only use secret chats.

              • rdri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                That’s not correct. Toy may call it TLS but it’s a custom protocol. Data is not kept unencrypted on their servers, according to their docs.

                • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Toy may call it TLS but it’s a custom protocol.

                  Sure, it’s mtproto. The security it provides for non-encrypted chats (which are the absolute majority of chats) is not any different from just having TLS for transport. It’s potentially even worse as it’s not as well-audited.

                  Data is not kept unencrypted on their servers, according to their docs.

                  That just means that they store both your data in some encrypted way and the key. They can still read it trivially. You don’t even have to know the protocol to understand why: you can add new devices without having any other device online, and read all non-secret chats. It might also just mean disk encryption, in which case it’s plain-text in RAM while the server is running.

      • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I see, perhaps I’m just unfamiliar with the criminal justice system in France

        In the United States, this would not be considered an arrest, but an investigative detention (a minor but important distinction)

    • krimson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Telegram never or rarely cooperates with authorities in investigations into terrorism, child abuse, drug trafficking, weapons marketplaces, etc. This is probably the main reason they arrested the guy.

      • ampersandcastles@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Probably because they can’t? It’s encrypted, yeah?

        Signal posts their subpoenas and responses that are usually like, ‘you fucking dolt, it’s encrypted, we don’t have access’

        • krimson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          They probably still have usernames, phone numbers and access logs with IP adresses even though the chats are encrypted.

        • balsoft@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Telegram is categorically less encrypted than Signal for most chats. It’s mostly the same level of security as Facebook Messenger, Instagram DMs, even Email (SMTP/IMAP over TLS) or SMS: it only encrypts communications between the client and the server. Telegram can read everything you send in regular chats. The only way to get end-to-end encryption (such that Telegram technically can’t access your communication) is by starting a fussy and inconvenient “secret chat”. It can only be done between two people (so no E2E group chats at all), only when both are online at the same time, and it only works on the devices on which the secret chat was initiated and accepted; in other words, as a frequent user I’ve only used it once for some really sensitive personal information. Even then Telegram still has access to a lot of metadata about messages: phone numbers of both parties, when the messages are sent, how big they are, etc.

          I’m not saying that cooperating with intelligence/LE agencies is always an ethical, or even a good choice, but Telegram demonstrably had the ability to do so.

      • doodledup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Dumbass didn’t encrypt the chats and didn’t do moderation according to local laws. If Facebook did the same as his company did, Mark Zuckerberg would share his fate.

    • Lucy :3@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Why tho? What makes Telegram even remotely attractive? It has less security for groups than other messengers that have even more features, and the PMs are also unencrypted by default. Telegram itself is just a stupid concept. In my mind, only the right/conservative furries are on Telegram, as that and criminals are Telegrams only clients.

      • EonNShadow@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        This is actually an insane take

        Furries at large don’t care about the e2ee or security features

        They care that:

        1. their friends are the platform

        2. custom stickers of their fursonas are easy to make and import

        That’s basically it. Telegram has become entirely ubiquitous in the fandom. No one group/ideology claims it as their own.

        Sincerely,

        a progressive leftist furry who uses TG

        • mamotromico@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          People underestimate how powerful stickers are to the average person

          I still miss the days of MSNPlus where I could add text shortcuts to display reaction images/gifs

  • ampersandcastles@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    “and the republics of the former Soviet Union”

    Wow, what a propaganda site considering the Soviet Union hasn’t existed since 91.

    • True@lemy.lolOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      Just to put the whole quotation:

      Telegram, particularly influential in Russia, Ukraine and the republics of the former Soviet Union, is ranked as one of the major social media platforms after Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, Instagram, TikTok and WeChat. It aims to hit 1 billion users in the next year.

      In my opinion they said it in this way instead of listing every country that this app is common in.

      • ampersandcastles@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I feel it was to reinforce that the USSR exists for Americans that still believe it. They don’t care about the word “former”, they just want a reason to hate what they perceive as communism despite them not being communist.

        It’s pure propaganda.