• @rdri
    link
    English
    14 months ago

    Something not being standardized doesn’t mean it’s bogus.

    • @rottingleaf
      link
      English
      04 months ago

      I think you are arguing against your own imagination. Something not being vetted by someone competent does mean it’s bogus in cryptography. Standardization is an unconnected subject. Most police forces over the world right now are using something standardized, but known to be utter crap.

      I think you are falling for the “genius inventor” fallacy clueless normies love a lot.

      TG’s E2EE is simply garbage until known otherwise. There’s no more depth to it. The reason it’s not known to be broken is that it’s not a high value target - most people don’t use “secret chats” in TG.

      • @rdri
        link
        English
        14 months ago

        I think you are falling for the “genius inventor” fallacy clueless normies love a lot.

        People advertising signal everywhere look like those kind of normies to me too. Doesn’t mean much.

        The reason it’s not known to be broken is that it’s not a high value target - most people don’t use “secret chats” in TG.

        Fair assumption. But it means you accept most people are stupid enough to not want such a feature or smart enough to not need it. Telegram user base is reported to be 900 million though.

        • @rottingleaf
          link
          English
          14 months ago

          So where am I advertising Signal?

          But it means you accept most people are stupid enough to not want such a feature or smart enough to not need it. Telegram user base is reported to be 900 million though.

          I didn’t get this.