(Cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/26559848/)
Some significant news for Telegram users!
See this article for some interesting backstory context on Pavel Durov and Telegram: https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-telegram-billionaire-and-his-dark-empire-a-f27cb79f-86ae-48de-bdbd-8df604d07cc8
Since the post article is in French, here’s an auto-translation:
Pavel Durov, the founder and CEO of the encrypted messaging service Telegram, was arrested around 8 p.m. on Saturday evening as he got off his private jet on the tarmac of Le Bourget airport. The 39-year-old Franco-Russian was accompanied by his bodyguard and a woman.
The arrest was carried out by the gendarmes of the GTA (Air Transport Gendarmerie). Registered in the RPF (wanted persons file), Pavel Durov came straight from Azerbaijan. He had over his head a French search warrant issued by the OFMIN of the National Directorate of the French Judicial Police, issued on the basis of a preliminary investigation.
Why was he under threat of a search warrant?
The Justice considers that the lack of moderation, cooperation with the police and the tools offered by Telegram (disposable number, cryptocurrencies, etc.) makes it complicit in drug trafficking, paedophile offences and fraud.
This search warrant ran if, and only if, Pavel Durov was on national territory. “He made a mistake tonight. We don’t know why… Was this flight just a step? In any case, he’s locked up!” a source close to the investigation told TF1/LCI. Since he knew he was persona non grata in France, Pavel Durov used to travel to the Emirates, the countries of the former USSR, South America… He travelled very little in Europe and avoided countries where Telegram is under surveillance.
And now?
Investigators from the ONAF (National Anti-Fraud Office attached to the Customs Directorate) notified him and placed him in police custody. He is expected to be presented to an investigating judge this Saturday evening before a possible indictment on Sunday for a multitude of offences: terrorism, drugs, complicity, fraud, money laundering, concealment, paedophile content…
“Pavel Durov will end up in pre-trial detention, that’s for sure,” comments an investigator to TF1/LCI. “On his platform, he allowed an incalculable number of misdemeanours and crimes to be committed for which he does nothing to moderate or cooperate,” said a source close to the case.
His pre-trial detention at the end of his indictment is indeed in no doubt. Pavel Durov, a billionaire, has substantial means to flee and his guarantees of representation will hardly convince the judges.
A net with international resonance
For the investigators, this international sweep has various objectives. First, it makes it possible to kick the anthill, impress and deter the perpetrators of crimes and offences who exchange, until now, freely on Telegram. Secondly, they aim to put pressure on European countries to step up joint work to make secure messaging on terrorist cases bend.
Indeed, Telegram is a hive of criminal content. At the moment, the platform is in the news with the illegal broadcasting of Ligue 1 matches. But on this encrypted messaging service, many accounts are used by organized crime. Beyond terrorism, the most dangerous pedophiles communicate on Telegram to exchange content. “It has become for years THE number 1 platform for organized crime,” comments an investigator.
Nope! Not if you believe privacy is a human right.
It’s more like renting an apartment or office space and not being liable for crimes that you cannot see. Malls are generally viewed as a public space (think unencrypted chat rooms). If you own a Mall and have no surveillance and security and continue to allow crime to happen after you’ve been asked to remediate the issue, you are aiding criminals, much like Pavel and Telegram if you consider that Telegram is not encrypted and they have the ability to view everything going on in their platform.
Apartments and business offices are more like “encrypted” chat rooms. You can’t be held liable if you’re unable to see crimes being committed.
I feel like the difference is not that big, though.
If you rent, your landlord has a right to enter your apartment, even though they rarely use that right. Sometimes, they can check on things. The same applies to apartments in personal ownership: if police has a warrant, they can enter and see if there’s illegal activity. So based on this analogy, no, apartments are not “encrypted” chat rooms, and I don’t think any significant number of places would be considered “encrypted” or “fully private”, if you must.
Continuing with the analogy, Telegram can view and intervene in the activity on the platform, just like landlords or police, but Durov, let’s call him a landlord, protects privacy of his tenants, not letting the law enforcement in.
Speaking of E2EE platforms, I’m sure there’s crime happening on them, because it’s logical for criminals to use more secure protocols, yet I don’t see the same arguments made about them. It’s just they are providing the same (better!) tools to the criminals without an option for law enforcement to see the content (but perhaps with options to ban on request).
And frankly I don’t think there’s too big of a difference between E2EE and non-E2EE platforms in terms of conscience: the former just deliberately deprive themselves of an opportunity to see what content goes through their services.
P.S. that said, I don’t think it’s ok that Telegram promotes the service as private, and that Durov ignored requests to nuke known illegal activity.
But the difference is massive. Telegram, because E2EE does not work for the majority of its use cases, is hoarding tons of CSAM and other illegal content. This isn’t just about the “criminals” who are adding illegal content, its about Telegram’s access and hoarding of this data.
On the other hand, Signal is simply a transport vehicle for data. No illegal content is stored or accessible by Signal, its developers or anyone who may gain access to their infrastructure - the complete opposite of the situation over at Telegram. Signal cannot be implied to be storing illegal content because they simply don’t store any content. Law enforcement can ask Signal to provide all the data they have on specific users, and they have, but the only data they have is when you created your account and the last day (not time) a client pinged their servers.