Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I am not using Telegram and wouldn't have used it if I was a US journalist working on something potentially dangerous, but I don't think this is a good argument.

As long as Telegram isn't compromised by USA-allied countries (Iran is somewhat allied with Russia), it might be a safer choice than Signal for US journalists. The reason is that USA can easily send a letter to Google that would reveal a lot about that person + they have root on the device.

Just like the safest place for Snowden right now is in Russia.




To me, this is madness. I shouldn't have to care what global power my messaging service is aligned with. With Signal, I don't.


With Signal, you clearly do as they send a lot of your information to Google explicitly (like contacts) and Google has root on your phone.


Is that completely accurate? As Moxie explained elsewhere they do sync contacts, but that's optional. I'm not sure there's any other dependency beyond the GCM push, which I don't know is very concerning.

Google definitely has root on your phone, but is that automatically an implication that Signal is compromised?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: