• Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    3 months ago

    Would you have more info on the differences? I was wondering the same thing, but I don’t know enough about Telegram to compare

    • pimeys@lemmy.nauk.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      68
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Signal always responds to authorities when they ask for data, and they give them all they have: the day they registered, their phone number and the timestamp they last used the app.

      Telegram has unencrypted channels of drug dealing, and what I heard is a lot of illegal porn too. The authorities want information on certain users there and Telegram doesn’t comply. This is directly against the law Signal is not breaking, because they always send all the data they have to the law enforcement.

      • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        3 months ago

        while not wrong context matters, US social media companies also enable human, weapons, and drug trafficking. they play a role in a few genocides too.

        but the western regime does not care.

        • pimeys@lemmy.nauk.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          But they give their data when the officials ask. That is all that matters. And I seriously hope none of us uses Telegram or WhatsApp to any discussions. Use Signal because that is so far pretty unbreakable.

          Telegram is already in the hands of that tiny Russian old man and WhatsApp is owned by a lizard.

        • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          All of the illegal stuff like that that I’ve seen around on social media always linked to telegram channels. Most of the time what you see on regular social media are bots advertising the telegram channels, where the real people are at

    • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m no authority on it but from what I’ve read it seems to have more to do with the social features of telegram where lots of content is being shared, both legal and illegal. Signal doesn’t have channels that support hundreds of thousands of people at once, nor media hosting to match.

      • socsa@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Right, the French authorities are going to present evidence that this dude was aware of specific illegal activity and refuse to comply with a legal warrant involving said actively, making him guilty of obstruction at best, and possibly conspiracy. Signal complies with warrants, they just don’t have anyone’s keys. Telegram has everyone’s keys, and theoretically could turn them over but they refuse. That’s a huge difference from a legal perspective.

        • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          3 months ago

          Thank you. I’m going to restate your explanation to be sure I’ve got it:

          • authorities want platforms to comply with legal requests
          • when Signal gets a subpoena, they open the key locker and show that it’s empty. They provide the metadata they can (sign up date and last seen date, full stop) and tell authorities they can’t do better.
          • when Telegram gets a subpoena, they open the key locker and show all the keys, then slam it shut in the face of the investigator, telling them to get bent.
          • conclusion: it’s easier to never have the keys in the first place than to tease the government with them