Unless you’re from the USA (the land of free SMS) you probably use a messaging app like WhatsApp, Telegram or Signal
Why? You get cross-device-sync, better features, ditch phone numbers as – identifiers, huge privacy gains, stickers & share media in an instant!
SMS is costly, outside of the US. At least in India — I don’t think I have ever used SMS other than receiving OTP codes, when signing up for some services. The average person’s SMS inbox is filled with spam. If you’re from the US, an iPhone user? you probably hate green bubble text messages.
This explains why apps like WhatsApp - from Facebook have taken over the world.
Most people don’t care about digital-privacy, or
user-freedom. They find comfort using what
everyone else is using. Whatever is ‘kewl’ in
*insert current year* It isn’t
something new, when GMail launched, people switched to GMail, it was what
using, TikTok, Instagram, people
are quick to ride the hype train.
Does Privacy = Security?
To most people,
Secure=Private=Anonymous are interchangeable words and mean
the same thing. People aren’t keen about digital-privacy, nor have the time to
look into the tech-stack behind the apps they use. Even if they are tech savvy
enough they can’t convince their friends to switch to better alternatives
because their friends aren’t using it ~ circular logic. Most people aren’t
clear when someone says ‘I care about privacy’ or something around the lines of
‘WhatsApp collects data’ - they’d think as long as it works, why not use it?
I am someone who values digital-privacy. For my communication these days I use messaging apps, I’m sorry but no one loves email anymore. There are some apps I use & some I don’t. I ditched WhatsApp, or as I’d like to call it: “Broken Up With the Facebook” apps.
Some of my needs
To communicate properly I need to use apps that qualify these basic requisites. Otherwise I’d fallback to PGP encrypted old-school email.
- free/libre software
- native cross platform support
- end-to-end / 0 knowledge encryption
- good track record keeping up their promises
- comfy UX (not a dire need, more like a want)
This blog post aims to review popular messaging apps one by one, in terms of popularity, starting with WhatsApp.
Born in 2009, a simple plain-text app that allowed users to update their status: I’m at the airport, at the gym, don’t ping me. People slowly began using it for sharing messages and it pivoted into an instant-messaging app. Later, in 2014 it sold out to Facebook and to this day Facebook runs & maintains it.
WhatsApp is a part of our social-fabric
It’s where grandpa gets the latest family photos, answers video calls with grandchildren, gets the daily dose of good-morning messages. You could say an app like WhatsApp has hacked into our emotions, just like the other - many $BigTech surveillance companies have. It leaves the user strangled, helpless, a manifestation of the unjust control the developer has over you, when using proprietary apps.
What else is wrong?
- 👎 free/libre software - app is proprietary
- 👎 native cross platform support - no GNU/Linux app
- 👎 end-to-end / 0 knowledge encryption - not possible when your app is proprietary
- 👎 bad track record keeping up their promises - after selling out to Facebook it’s all downhill
- 👍 an okay UX - doesn’t matter now, anyway
- 👎 being proprietary is why I’ll pass, not to mention Facebook’s track record.
Major news sites just jump on the bandwagon
Copy paste first hand information from the app’s page or what the spokesperson says. it does more harm than good. News & media sites keep using the buzzword ~ ‘End To End Encryption’ claiming your messages are secure - because Facebook says so. There’s no use when you have a proprietary encryption algorithm. We can not verify such claims, on the user’s end. They don’t school readers about ‘verifying’ over ‘blindly trusting’.
Leaving readers confused - thinking privacy is some vague, trivial issue that can’t be solved even with end-to-end encryption deployed by WhatsApp. Here are some examples
- Here’s how you can keep your WhatsApp chats secure - End to end encryption | The Economic Times
- Messages are end-to-end encrypted, says WhatsApp amid alleged leaks | The Indian Express
- Amid leaked chats of Bollywood actors, WhatsApp reiterates messages are end-to-end encrypted | The Hindu
End to end is useless when WhatsApp itself can not assure their users
That data of both parties in a chat would not be backed up to Google Drive or iCloud. Your data is free for the NCB or any government agency to clone your SIM card & take over all your chats. They don’t enforce 2FA pins too like Signal.
show me the encryption?
We can’t prove they use the latest version of the Signal Protocol; the only hope you have is an old article from Signal talking about their work with WhatsApp - you have to trust Moxie’s word from 2017. Moxie keeps mum when asked about this.
track record ~ who are their real users?
No hard bound proofs, as I said. Even if your trust them today: data once collected can be misused. In the worst case always assume it will be misused. It is in their interest as an advertising company to misuse this data. That’s how they make money.
First looks; their Desktop App sucks. Both in performance & features. It’s another Electron app. I don’t like electron apps. If at all I want to run electron apps I’d run them in my browser of choice instead since browser’s bundle the same code to run electron apps. I also don’t like exposing electron apps to my filesystem and other system-level resources. Signal does not give user’s the freedom to use 3rd party clients with their servers.
vetted cryptography ✅
Signal is built on something called the Signal Protocol. The cryptography implementation arguably is the best in the eyes of modern cybersecurity & privacy researchers. Perfect forward secrecy, and clever ways to minimize meta-data. Signal is a good recommendation and the Signal Protocol is the industry standard, when communicating securely. There are other messengers like Session - a fork of Signal which takes the Signal Protocol and builds on top of that.
Quick reminder: In these hard times, when we focus on local vulnerabilities as @zoom_us had, @signalapp on Desktop still stores the encryption key in a plaintext file. So, any malicious app running with typical user permissions may decrypt your messages. 😅 1/x — Wojciech Reguła (@_r3ggi) April 7, 2020*
A rouge program can scan & send the encryption key to the attacker
Well, you got to have some basic OPSEC hygiene when trying to talk privately. I’d not explicitly blame Signal, but being end-to-end doesn’t mean your messages aren’t private after they are delivered (reach the other end). Using Signal doesn’t magically improve your OPSEC hygiene.
By default notifications are visible to the host OS
The same thing, but for mobile phones. Here Telegram Secret Chats > Better than normal Signal chats it hides previews for ‘both sides’ when using Telegram’s mobile clients. Here’s an old article I wrote to harden Signal
There’s no way to bulk un-send messages you’ve already sent like Telegram or Matrix. Your only hope is to use ‘disappearing messages’ with everyone. Which I do - in case you message me on Signal. I don’t want messages to stick around forever!
Moxie promoting centralization
They (Signal) is hostile to forks, and 3rd party clients. They claim, opening up to 3rd party forks dilutes their security standards, & overall security promises. I’d rather have control over worrying about security. But there’s more to it.
- Please help me understand why is GPL3 library used in proprietary software WhatsApp?
- Reflections: The ecosystem is moving
- Server side code was last updated on 23rd April 2020 and is licensed under AGPL 3.0
Signal is not going to bother with decentralization. They practically gave up, and decided to fix and build stuff for the centralized world of messaging. As of now it looks fine, but sooner or later, funding, censorship, bandwidth and load balancing will be a pain. Users, just like WhatsApp have to use the official Signal server, which in turn is hosted on Amazon & Google servers. I don’t think their clients natively would ever support logging in to alternate servers or promote anything outside of their ecosystem. That’s why I don’t like donating or promoting Signal in the long run. Read - We can do better than Signal
Good tool, not a platform
- 👍 free/libre software - apps are FOSS
- 👍 native cross platform support - meh, electron apps but okay
- 👍 end-to-end / 0 knowledge encryption - no compromises, vetted industry standard
- 👍 good track record keeping up their promises - they’ve digressed, adding bloat like - integrating a crypto wallet (MobileCoin) in their apps but okay in terms of privacy promises
- 👎 comfy UX - it can do a better job, it should get on par with Telegram’s apps
- 👍 I use Signal, it doesn’t compromise on security, in my opinion it works for short term, ephemeral conversations and calls
As mentioned before, Signal’s servers are non-free. Not the code, their policy. They don’t allow 3rd party clients, even though the code running is all GPLv3 libre-software. Not being able to customize my config sucks, I want to have control over my comms and setup, not depend on Signal and wait them to develop new features.
Signal isn’t the place for non end-to-end encrypted chats, like public chatrooms or live-events. It’s a good tool for a niche usecase, but not a good ‘all-in-one’ platform. Pick decentralization > centralization.
The biggest problem in Telegram is that people tag it as an end-to-end encrypted messaging app. If you ask any Telegram user they don’t use Secret Chats unless it’s needed. It’s a hybrid between Twitter / Discord with public chatrooms & channels. Even if you don’t plan to use it for 1-1 chats it still is better than Twitter or Discord for group chats. That being said there are better things than Telegram ~ Mastodon / matrix are better alternatives.
The CEO ~ Durov keeps claiming till date they’ve disclosed 0 bytes of cloudchat data with 3rd parties; he claims ~ Signal, Tor & other US Open Tech Fund projects have vulnerabilities & backdoors, because they’re funded by the US. He doesn’t back his claims with proof. On the other hand - no one except Durov knows about the ‘0 bytes shared’ claim. But the talk of backdoor in ‘Tor or Signal’ can be clearly proved to be false.
Just like Telegram’s apps Tor and Signal are transparent, well-documented, libre software. You can mathematically verify ‘E2E encryption’ with QR / verification codes, or run nodes & try to decipher Tor traffic.
Durov is biased towards Tor, I think here is what he was planning to do: TON used to build a Tor clone as a proxy for Telegram in censorship prone regions. It was almost done, and then poof the SEC / US gov killed it. I assume this is why he is biased against Tor / the US Gov.
For Durov ~ Signal seems shady
But their native mobile apps are solid in terms of security. i.e. If you verify QR codes. I don’t need to trust Tor or Signal here. I can verify by default, all chats in person with a QR code that my chats aren’t being intercepted. You can do this on Telegram too [Secret Chats] but not ON by default.
Edward Snowden explains it well
“We’ve seen some improvements, and that’s not nothing. But not the revolutionary rework it needs. Telegram still seems to encourage dangerous cloud messaging instead of secret chats. Experts ask “why?” And the answer is “convenience.” That’s unsafe. — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) December 30, 2017
And this is where we start getting to my core concerns. @Telegram has for years faced criticisms about the basic structure of its security by prominent cryptographers and technologists. Many defenses rely upon unbroken trust in a central authority (the company). “Trust us.” — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) December 30, 2017
Trust us not to turn over data. Trust us not to read your messages. Trust us not to close your channel. Maybe @Durov is an angel. I hope so! But angels have fallen before. Telegram should have been working to make channels decentralized—meaning outside their control—for years. — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) December 30, 2017
So is Telegram bad?
Edward basically summarized what you compromise when you use Telegram ~ ’trust’
- 👍 free/libre software - all clients are FOSS
- 👍 native cross platform support - really good support, native QT / Swift / Android / Windows UWP / PWA apps
- 👎 end-to-end / 0 knowledge encryption - own standard, built for speed; but hasn’t had major mass-exploited vulnerabilities unlike WhatsApp
- 👍 good track record keeping up their promises - they’ve fought many times against suppressive governments, denying encryption keys, or share cloud-chat data of their users, it’s okay in terms of privacy promises as long as Durov is in charge
- 👍 comfy UX - literally the best, in terms of UX; every update is like eyecandy
- 👍 I use Telegram, I have to compromise on 0 knowledge encryption, but I use it for public-group chats, managing todo-lists and groupchats (where I assume everything is public anyway), again, in my opinion it works for short term, also ~ ephemeral conversations and 1-on-1 calls [E2E]
Basically what Telegram does right now is manage the keys, assure users - as long as Durov is CEO; they’ll keep your cloud chats safe. This is still trust. Trust as in - you ’trust’ they haven’t handed over keys via legal safeguards like splitting encryption keys & distributing it to different jurisdictions. Although one day they can in the future just give up & knock you off your feet ~ because this is privacy by trust & not by design (as far as cloud chats go)
Verifying, clearly gives you peace of mind than trusting someone
cloudchats + instant sync is something that can help with IRL privacy + convenience
If my phone gets stolen I can un-send all the years of chats from another device. Or a chat with my friend and I from my friend’s device. If you value security, you should use Signal. But as I said Security does not equal privacy. You can’t un-send messages on Signal that easily. Telegram gives you IRL applications of privacy.
In case of an emergency or decide to delete your account - what you can do on Telegram is delete your chats from both ends, assuming they don’t log stuff (No way to prove or disprove this yet).
What they need to do is roll out: 0 knowledge encryption
Things can vastly improve! Reduce the ’trust factor’ I suggested to set a minimum a — 12 word seed as a passphrase like how Bitwarden, ProtonMail, Bitwarden, MEGA Cloud or most crypto wallets work.
All encryption and decryption should happen, ‘on device’. E2E 0 knowledge encryption for all users, with a coming update. Assuring 2FA and an event should they have to hand over data, it would take years to decrypt depending on the encryption algorithm they plan to use. Something MTProto 3 should tackle. The only thing left out in terms of security would be perfect forward secrecy. In fact right now that’s how Telegram Passport works.
Update: Durov says he’s ’exploring that path’ when I asked him.
This would mean no server side search ~ I think it’s a valid compromise. Also: if they can do server side search? don’t they have the ability to just clone our plain-text messages any time?
Here are some ideas about that 12 word seed that I talked about
Actually they had built these things: for the TON wallet / TON network. Hover your cursor over the screenshots
[matrix] ~ redpilled?
Matrix is a protocol/platform rather than a new messaging app
Unlike the Signal Protocol which is centralized - Matrix could solve decentralized peer-to-peer & federated messaging. Personally if you’d give me $100 to donate to any of these messaging platforms. I would fund Matrix. The most daring among the others, making slow but steady progress in terms of cutting edge communication technology.
As of right now it has many issues compared to Signal - because of it’s decentralized nature (meta-data issues). But I would rather fund to fix those issues than fund Signal which says - ‘we don’t care’
I would not recommend it for 1 on 1 messaging just yet, unless you both know how to use [Matrix], and can maintain good OPSEC hygiene, not revealing too much info when chatting. It’s practical for public forums, government forums and events but not for one on one chats unless they’re peer to peer - which, btw is also coming!
If I host a public group, as an inclusive leader: I would pick/host a matrix server
Matrix also supports bridges - bridging with Jabber/XMPP, IRC, Discord, Telegram, you name it! Literally anything - that can be hacked on, with enough eyeballs looking at it. I do this for my matrix chatroom, which you can join here, briding Matrix & Telegram.
- 👍 free/libre software - DIY clients that are FOSS
- 👍 native cross platform support - basically runs anywhere
- 👍 / 👎 end-to-end / 0 knowledge encryption - built for scaling & federation; tho - it’s up to the sys-admins to keep maintain upto-date up-stream patches, tho leaking meta-data is an pain
- 👍 good track record keeping up their promises - there’s something new every week, in an open, youtube styled, dev-vlog series - “this week in [Matrix]”
- 👎 bad UX - literally the worst part about [Matrix]; onboarding will be hard, the default clients have a lot of polishing left to do. It’s growing organically, without much marketing or hype, so it’ll be okay, not pissing off users in its early stages.
- 👍 I use [Matrix] for public chats, I have to compromise (meta data) if I do E2E 1-on-1 chats. I am really excited what Matrix will solve in the future. I plan to move to my own [Matrix] homeserver on my website in the no-so-far future, that helps with meta-data.
People, (mostly gamers) use it for low latency comms. Discord is worse than Telegram or [Matrix] in terms of encryption; rather, all chats are plain-text & public domain, not even encrypted at rest, or utilize browser caches that expire. You can (right click on an image in a chat and fetch your photos, shared in a chat). Just like Google Photos, Instagram or Messenger DMs. The only reason I would use Discord is to bring everyone trapped in Discord to [Matrix] ~ #FediFirst
Discord proudly says, they spy on all your running apps and messages, run it through their AI and flag it. So don’t expect privacy on Discord
- 👎 free/libre software - Proprietary clients built on permissive OSS tool-kits ~ shame, shame, shame!
- 👍 native cross platform support - basically electron PWA apps, but unlike WhatsApp it is makes more sense going the PWA route.
- 👎 end-to-end / 0 knowledge encryption - plain text messages, piped through some AI scanning shit, worse than WhatsApp
- 👎 bad track record - famous for annoying users - demanding their phone numbers, holding their accounts hostage, tracking current running system processes, et. al.
- 👍 / 👎 addictive UX - really good at hooking users, you get the dopamine hit whenever you hear that Discord notification ping! can’t say much but they know how to target their primary audience.
- 👎 I don’t use Discord. It’s ‘cringy’ what else can I say, please don’t use it. Especially for FOSS projects — relying on a proprietary user-subjugating tools? That’s a joke!
Why do people use Discord?
Idk, its what the kewl kids use, sorry I don’t have any of the Gen-Z traits 😮💨
Use Signal with ‘disappearing messages’ - but miss out on cloud chats & other UX stuff found on Telegram.
Use Matrix for Public group chats or at least ensure you can bridge it to [Matrix] first. Don’t use it for DMs unless you’re Peer To Peer or own the homeserver.
Use Telegram for casual, non-personal chats, & clear your history for both sides once a year. Make sure you keep an eye out if Telegram server’s get raided or if Durov resigns, should - Telegram not use 0 knowledge encryption by then.
Last updated: Jan 22’