[HN Gopher] Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport
        
       Author : NoxiousPluK
       Score  : 384 points
       Date   : 2024-08-24 20:46 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | greatgib wrote:
       | I did not see the info anywhere else, but it was just broadcasted
       | by the main French tv channel. Pavel Durov, the Telegram founder
       | was just arrested out of his airplane in the Bourget airport in
       | France near Paris.
       | 
       | There is no info about why exactly he was arrested but it looks
       | like that French police had a warrant for him.
       | 
       | But it looks like it is because that he is accused of being an
       | accessory of a lot of things like traffic, drugs,
       | pedopornography, anything bad you can image because he would not
       | have done anything to combat that on Telegram.
       | 
       | If it is real, it would really be the same kind of political
       | crime abuse on an individual of the same level as what happened
       | to Julian Assange.
       | 
       | I can easily guess that assholes in secret service would probably
       | like very much to use that to blackmail him to add backdoors to
       | telegram. So sad.
        
         | Glacia wrote:
         | >I can easily guess that assholes in secret service would
         | probably like very much to use that to blackmail him to add
         | backdoors to telegram
         | 
         | Do you unironically believe it's not already backdoored for
         | Russian government?
        
           | greatgib wrote:
           | Since forever I stay suspicious but so far Telegram as an
           | impeccable track record. Never there was a single instance of
           | case where there would be even a suspicion of proof that
           | insider knowledge of conversations was accessed/used.
           | 
           | Also, it is clear that Durov is a dissident and personally
           | experienced and run away of the dictatorial state. So I think
           | that it is probably one of the tech personality that I trust
           | the most in the world.
        
             | ceinewydd wrote:
             | https://x.com/filosottile/status/987376021589692416?s=21
             | 
             | I'm not sure that counts as an impeccable track record.
        
             | hamilyon2 wrote:
             | The latest evidence of wide cooperation of telegram and
             | Russian officials:
             | https://roskomsvoboda.org/ru/post/shutdown-v-baymake/
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | The article doesn't contain the evidence though; it
               | claims that someone changed access to private for a
               | Telegram group that covered the protests. However, as the
               | article says, it could be done not only by Telegram, but
               | by one of the administrators.
        
               | Glacia wrote:
               | Except there were multiple different groups that
               | magically happen to go private at the same time.
               | 
               | I'm not even going to mention how many people were
               | arrested over telegram messages in russia.
        
             | lxgr wrote:
             | "Track record" is an incredibly poor indicator for the lack
             | of a government backdoor, thinking back to Snowden, for
             | example.
        
             | Glacia wrote:
             | Obviously FSB is not going to make a press release and be
             | like "We have the keys LOL" so there would never be
             | definitive proof.
             | 
             | Fun fact: Telegram at some point was blocked in Russia for
             | not giving FSB access to data. Later telegram was unblocked
             | and is used extensively in Russia. It's not hard to figure
             | out why it was unblocked.
        
               | ivanmontillam wrote:
               | > It's not hard to figure out why it was unblocked.
               | 
               | If you're implying it's backdoored, that's a wild mental
               | gymnastics you made there.
               | 
               | No hate, but your comment is speculative in nature.
        
               | k1ndl1 wrote:
               | It was unblocked because of the backlash from people,
               | incl. Russian politicians who are heavy Telegram users.
               | FSB has nothing to do with it.
        
               | Glacia wrote:
               | >It was unblocked because of the backlash from people,
               | incl. Russian politicians who are heavy Telegram users.
               | FSB has nothing to do with it.
               | 
               | Saying Russian government would give a shit about people
               | opinions, funny joke.
        
               | roveo wrote:
               | Telegram wasn't fully blocked in Russia even for a single
               | day. They tried to block it and failed miserably. The
               | team actively circumvented the blocking by deploying to
               | new IPs faster than they were blocked, and in addition to
               | that every IT guy in Russia had a tgproxy instance
               | running for family and friends.
               | 
               | After a while they just stopped trying and decided that
               | it's less reputational damage to just let it be.
        
               | Glacia wrote:
               | >After a while they just stopped trying and decided that
               | it's less reputational damage to just let it be.
               | 
               | That's not true. It's legally unblocked. the reason why
               | it was unblocked was never published. "It was unblocked
               | because they gave up" is just your interpretation of the
               | events. Pretty naive one, in my opinion.
        
               | perchlorate wrote:
               | This is pure FUD. They're still trying to block it, the
               | latest three attempts happened this week. Two of them
               | were done in the middle of the night as training
               | exercise, maybe for 3-4 hours each, and the last one then
               | happened in the middle of the day. All three broke large
               | parts of the internet and were quickly reverted.
               | 
               | When something newsworthy happens in some region, all
               | messengers get blocked in that region for days, Telegram
               | included. They don't care about collateral damage to
               | other websites then.
        
               | cactusplant7374 wrote:
               | What is an example of something that is newsworthy?
        
               | perchlorate wrote:
               | Here is a couple of typical examples when blocking is
               | limited to a single region:
               | 
               | https://storage.googleapis.com/gsc-link/cbe9d20e.html
               | 
               | https://t.me/agentstvonews/4973
               | 
               | https://t.me/meduzalive/94295
        
               | CoastalCoder wrote:
               | I'm curious how the people attempting news blackouts
               | reason about it.
               | 
               | I doubt they explicitly say to themselves, "Today I do
               | evil for fun and profit.". I wonder what their
               | rationalization is.
        
               | Glacia wrote:
               | You're the one who is spreading FUD. Telegram was
               | officially (legally) unblocked in 2020. There is 0
               | evidence there is an active force trying to block
               | Telegram in Russia. Which is very busy blocking every
               | non-russian platform btw. As you yourself pointed out,
               | most likely the reason why TG was down is because of
               | attempts to block other platforms.
        
             | evilfred wrote:
             | "impeccable track record" lmao
             | https://www.wired.com/story/the-kremlin-has-entered-the-
             | chat...
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | By the way, Dropbox had a person from the govt (Condoleezza
             | Rice) on the Board of Directors, and people still entrusted
             | their data to it.
        
           | chucke1992 wrote:
           | > Do you unironically believe it's not already backdoored for
           | Russian government?
           | 
           | Yes. You should read the history of Durov and why Telegram
           | was created in the first place.
        
             | z_open wrote:
             | Why don't you post it yourself. And why should I care about
             | what he says when telegram has some of the worst default
             | encryption settings among commonly used messaging apps in
             | the west?
        
               | chucke1992 wrote:
               | Except Telegram is considered one of the most secured
               | apps around. Obviously it cannot stop people from being
               | stupid when they expose themselves.
               | 
               | The very reason why France is not happy is that because
               | they cannot get access to private chats and stuff. EU was
               | (and is) pushing for the end of E2E encryption after all
               | (it failed this time, but they will try again).
               | 
               | Durov created Telegram because the russian government was
               | trying to take over his original social network - VK
               | (basically imagine USA gov taking over Facebook). Thus he
               | sold his shared and left the country.
               | 
               | I do find it hilarious to see apologists of government
               | over-reach like you.
        
               | z_open wrote:
               | What about group chat encryption? You can not possible
               | say telegram is more secure than signal or WhatsApp.
               | 
               | What did I say that made me an apologist for government
               | overreach? I recommend users use Signal? Your accusation
               | is unfounded when I was complaining about a lack of
               | encryption.
        
               | chucke1992 wrote:
               | With Whatsapp it is pretty obvious at this point that it
               | is in cahoot with governments in regards of backdoors and
               | stuff. With Signal? Who knows? Maybe too.
               | 
               | Governments don't go after services that they can access
               | freely.
        
               | timeon wrote:
               | > I do find it hilarious to see apologists of government
               | over-reach like you.
               | 
               | Can you point to the relevant part of the comment?
        
               | StrLght wrote:
               | How is this even relevant? Telegram doesn't have E2EE
               | enabled by default. Group chats aren't encrypted _at
               | all_.
        
             | mightybyte wrote:
             | Here's a long personal interview with Durov.
             | 
             | https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1780355490964283565
             | 
             | I know that TuckerCarlson is a polarizing character. My
             | posting of this link is not any kind of statement for or
             | against him or his politics. That being said, the interview
             | really gives an interesting picture of Pavel Durov IMO. If
             | you can ignore Carlson's annoying tangents into American
             | politics, you get to hear a good bit of Durov's life story
             | straight from his mouth in reasonable detail. I came away
             | from it with a more positive picture of Durov and Telegram.
        
           | tssge wrote:
           | [deleted]
        
             | lxgr wrote:
             | Telegram has, by design, message content accessible to
             | whoever runs the servers. WhatsApp has gone to great
             | lengths to not have that.
             | 
             | Obviously there's client security, potential backdoors,
             | unencrypted backups, and many other things to worry about.
             | But I don't see a scenario where it fares worse than
             | Telegram, and many where it's significantly better.
        
               | bn-l wrote:
               | Whatsapp has to have some kind of escape hatch if not
               | back door simply because of the amount of heat it doesn't
               | get (think of all the regimes who are ok with it).
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | I believe that escape hatch to be cloud backups, which
               | are heavily encouraged by the UI and not end-to-end
               | encrypted by default. iMessage has made the same
               | compromise.
               | 
               | As long as enough people click that checkbox, law
               | enforcement has access and Meta/Apple are out of the news
               | without having lied about or hidden anything.
        
             | evilfred wrote:
             | telegram is undoubtedly influenced by the Russian govt
             | https://www.wired.com/story/the-kremlin-has-entered-the-
             | chat...
        
             | jimbob45 wrote:
             | My understanding is that WhatsApp has never made claims
             | comparable to Telegram or Signal.
             | 
             | I also can't tell if you're being sincere. I was under the
             | impression that Telegram was considered significantly less
             | secure than Signal and that the matter was mostly settled.
             | I've been seeing the following talking points repeated for
             | years now.
             | 
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/signal/comments/xk1jdw/comment/ipb
             | v...
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | > Do you unironically believe it's not already backdoored for
           | Russian government?
           | 
           | To people arguing against this, Russia's Sovereign Wealth
           | Fund RDIF has an ownership stake in Telegram after co-raising
           | with Abu Dhabi's Mudabala in 2021 [0]
           | 
           | Either way, Telegram is at the whims of MbZ, and if the UAE
           | ever needs something from Russia, they'll use Durov and
           | Telegram as collateral. The UAE's done the same thing with
           | Pakistan (Musharraf, Nawaz Sharif), India (Dawood Ibrahim),
           | Israel-Palestine (Mohammad Dahlan), Serbia (Belgrade
           | Waterfront Project and Mohammad Dahlan), Turkiye (Mohammad
           | Dahlan), etc.
           | 
           | If the Telegram founders were truly opposed to Russia, they
           | would have immigrated to Israel, the UK, Germany,
           | Netherlands, or the US like most business dissidents in
           | Russia. If VK wasn't stolen by an oligarch, they would have
           | remained in Russia to this day.
           | 
           | [0] -
           | https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-23/russia-
           | mu...
        
           | GaggiX wrote:
           | >Do you unironically believe it's not already backdoored for
           | Russian government?
           | 
           | Yes as Telegram was banned in Russia for a long time (or at
           | least they tried) before giving up.
        
             | marcinzm wrote:
             | If they backdoored it between those events then it'd be
             | logical to unban it.
        
               | GaggiX wrote:
               | There was no need, Russia did try by banning a lot of IP
               | ranges but Telegram at the end was still running.
        
           | palata wrote:
           | There is no need for a backdoor since the vast majority of
           | messages on Telegram are not end-to-end encrypted. Just read
           | from the server!
        
           | kgeist wrote:
           | Durov was notorious in Russia for refusing to cooperate with
           | FSB (successor to KGB), too. I remember when FSB asked him to
           | give access to protester communications on VK (in 2011 during
           | mass protests), he mockingly responded with a picture of a
           | dog with its tongue out (showing your tongue means "I won't
           | give it to ya" in Russian culture). That's why he left
           | Russia, because he felt he'd get arrested soon. Quite ironic
           | that he ended up getting arrested in the "free world", not
           | Russia. Telegram was also banned in Russia for a few years.
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | And my intuition is that Telegram is going to become banned
             | in Russia soon, as Youtube is being banned now and Telegram
             | is the last popular application where you can find the
             | content about war, protests or elections that govt doesn't
             | like.
        
               | kgeist wrote:
               | Telegram has also large Russian pro-war communities, and
               | it's extensively used by soldiers deployed in Ukraine for
               | communication. If pro-war channels outnumber opposition
               | channels (and they probably do), Telegram probably won't
               | be banned as long the government has no alternative.
               | 
               | The fact of Durov getting arrested could be also used for
               | propaganda purposes (no free speech in the West).
        
             | llm_trw wrote:
             | To slightly mis-quote the only good Soviet joke that came
             | out after the fall of the USSR:
             | 
             | The Communists lied to us about Communism, unfortunately
             | they didn't lie about the West.
        
               | cactusplant7374 wrote:
               | I don't get it.
        
               | llm_trw wrote:
               | The USSR was a totalitarian hell hole which had nothing
               | to do with what communism was supposed to be.
               | 
               | It was still better than what happened to the USSR
               | between 1993 and 2000 when the West won the cold war and
               | dictated surrender terms.
        
               | kgeist wrote:
               | Nitpick: USSR was never officially a communist state, it
               | was a "socialist" state. I remember the Soviet government
               | had slogans like "we will build communism by 1980" etc.
               | No one thought they already had communism. IIRC their
               | idea was that, to build communism, you must have some
               | kind of transitional state/ideology first. But something
               | went wrong :)
        
             | baxtr wrote:
             | So you don't think that there a chance this could be
             | cleverly staged?
        
               | kgeist wrote:
               | Anything is possible, of course. But without evidence,
               | it'd consider it nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
        
             | timeon wrote:
             | > Telegram was also banned in Russia for a few years.
             | 
             | What has changed since then?
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | The procedures and setup for censoring the Internet were
               | significantly improved; no need to go to the court, no
               | need to exchange data with ISPs, black boxes with DPI are
               | installed at every large ISP, compared to blacklists of
               | IP/hostname hat were sent to ISPs before.
               | 
               | I think this might become a future for most of the
               | countries; China and Russia are just several years ahead.
        
               | kgeist wrote:
               | IIRC the bans weren't successful because the Telegram
               | client had a system which announced new servers/IPs via
               | push notifications. So they easily evaded it. Plus, the
               | agency responsible for the bans got a bad rep after
               | accidentally banning lots of unrelated services, ruining
               | random businesses in Russia.
               | 
               | Maybe they also understood that if you can't defeat them,
               | lead them. Currently, Telegram has a lot of pro-war, pro-
               | Kremlin channels.
        
             | KennyBlanken wrote:
             | > Telegram was also banned in Russia for a few years.
             | 
             | And how exactly do you think it got unbanned?
             | 
             | Their "encryption" used to use an in-house algorithm (in
             | house algorithms almost always are vastly inferior to
             | standard ones) and even today encryption stores the keys on
             | their servers (in Russia...) and E2EE has to be enabled
             | per-conversation by hand.
        
           | timcobb wrote:
           | Yeah why would it be backdoored by the Russian government?
           | Because Durov is Russian?
        
         | Simulacra wrote:
         | Feels very much like a political crime, how soon until Mark
         | Zuckerberg is arrested for WhatsApp?
        
           | lxgr wrote:
           | There's a world of a difference between refusing to hand over
           | data you have to the authorities, and plausibly not having
           | stored them in the first place.
           | 
           | By end-to-end encrypting messages, but uploading backups to
           | Google Drive and iCloud, and in a non-end-to-end encrypted
           | way by default, WhatsApp (and iMessage, which does largely
           | the same) have quite cleverly maneuvered themselves out of
           | that potential source of legal problems without cutting off
           | law enforcement access entirely.
        
         | aquatica wrote:
         | > "I can easily guess that assholes in secret service would
         | probably like very much to use that to blackmail him to add
         | backdoors to telegram. So sad."
         | 
         | Telegram is a backdoor by design. The server has complete
         | access to all your messages, they can do whatever they want
         | with those.
         | 
         | And they even had a backdoor in E2EE chats, see:
         | https://habr.com/ru/articles/206900/
        
           | k1ndl1 wrote:
           | This was a bug that was fixed right after it was reported.
           | The author of the article praised Telegram for the speed of
           | reaction.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | Note that America has been caught spying on EU countries
           | politicians and manufacturers so many times and nobody got
           | ever punished for this. While the backdoor talks are purely
           | hypothetical, and Telegram's client and protocol are open
           | source: you can just study the code.
        
           | noobermin wrote:
           | Do you have a link in english?
        
         | gmueckl wrote:
         | That is absolutely not how it works. If you offer a platform
         | for public discourse you are required by law to moderate it or
         | face the consequences. Telegram group chats are technically
         | open to moderation, yet the company has done nothing to put any
         | kind of moderation in place.
         | 
         | This is in contrast to Facebook or Twitter. Those platforms
         | will absolutely take down content that is offensive or criminal
         | in nature.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | You can report any post in public or private groups to
           | moderators.
        
             | gmueckl wrote:
             | I don't see a report button anywhere in the Android app.
             | Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.
        
           | bamboozled wrote:
           | That's good, while prosecutors and law enforcement are
           | wasting time building a car against him, the drug dealers and
           | pedophiles will just carry on elsewhere.
        
           | k1ndl1 wrote:
           | Actually, there is a moderation within Telegram; it is not at
           | the scale of Meta & X in terms of the head-count. Telegram
           | probably has 100x less employees than Meta (I don't know the
           | actual number) https://telegram.org/tos/eu-dsa
        
           | alex00 wrote:
           | Facebook does not generally take down content that is
           | offensive or criminal in nature.
           | 
           | The have moderation teams because they are required by law.
           | These are outsourced to the lowest bidder. They are so
           | overwhelmed by the amount of that content.
           | 
           | Watch those documentaries about the psychological traumas
           | inflicted to those that moderate Facebook content.
        
           | marcuskane2 wrote:
           | So he's a political prisoner.
           | 
           | The political establishment doesn't want the proletariat
           | having journalism that reports against the wishes of the
           | powerful or of regular people having free speech to be used
           | against the government.
           | 
           | No ethical person should take part in enforcing these laws.
        
         | seszett wrote:
         | > _There is no info about why exactly he was arrested but it
         | looks like that French police had a warrant for him._
         | 
         | > _But it looks like it is because that he is accused of being
         | an accessory of a lot of things like traffic, drugs,
         | pedopornography, anything bad you can image because he would
         | not have done anything to combat that on Telegram._
         | 
         | This very article says that it's because Telegram doesn't
         | cooperate with authorities in handling illegal content (which
         | it is legally obligated to, to operate in France) and provides
         | services to facilitate illegal activities (crypto or throwaway
         | numbers).
         | 
         | It's in the "why was he arrested" section.
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | I hate the way Telegram always gets flak for crime when
         | WhatsApp and Signal can be used for it just as well and they
         | are even harder to track things down on because they have E2EE.
         | Telegram by default doesn't and it doesn't even support it in
         | group chats!
         | 
         | So if these things happen in WhatsApp or Signal we simply don't
         | know about it.
        
       | chad1n wrote:
       | From Telegram sources: >Pavel Durov faces up to 20 years in
       | prison in France. The trial will take place very soon - sources
       | close to the investigation.
       | 
       | In addition to drug trafficking, he is accused of collaborating
       | with an organized crime group, covering up for pedophiles, fraud
       | and money laundering.
       | 
       | I don't know how reliable this is, but I've seen in 3-4 sources
       | that he's arrested for terrorism, child abuse, drug trafficking
       | (not providing data to prosecutors).
        
         | Oras wrote:
         | If it is an encrypted service, how would the company censor and
         | tackle these issues? I'm asking from a technical standpoint.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | Telegram has public and private groups. They probably want to
           | jail him for not pre-moderating every posted message.
        
             | Oras wrote:
             | That's my question, if messages are end to end encrypted
             | then the company does not have access to censor, right?
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Messages in groups are not E2E encrypted, especially in
               | public groups where anyone can read them even without
               | joining. However, anyone can report the message to
               | moderators. The public groups are often limited
               | (temporarily removed from search, temporarily or
               | permanently banned) if they do too much violations.
        
               | Gualdrapo wrote:
               | > However, anyone can report the message to moderators.
               | 
               | Good luck with that. And that's a seriously big issue.
               | Moderators (and "moderators" in Telegram mean an alleged
               | team of people they hire to moderate all content in
               | Telegram - if you report content, the group
               | administrators won't even be notified about that so they
               | can act by themselves first) in most cases won't do
               | absolutely anything.
        
               | skyyler wrote:
               | The messages are not end to end encrypted.
               | 
               | There is a feature that can be enabled to create an end-
               | to-end encrypted chat between strictly two users, but
               | most people do not actually use it.
               | 
               | Telegram is largely a social network masquerading as a
               | messaging app. There is a deep network of "channels" that
               | interlink with each other to provide a community for
               | users. None of that is encrypted.
        
               | a0123 wrote:
               | That's how successful Telegram's PR has been. People
               | believe - like you do - that it's end to end encrypted.
               | It's not.
               | 
               | The secret chats presumably are (if you trust Telegram).
               | Secret chats are 1 to 1. So anything outside of those
               | that most people on Telegram access (massive channels and
               | groups, smaller groups, private groups and channels) is
               | NOT encrypted.
        
           | EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
           | It is not encrypted by default. By default, everything goes
           | through Telegram servers and can be read there.
        
         | codedokode wrote:
         | If he intentionally cooperated with criminals then it is one
         | thing. But if someone posted something illegal, and nobody
         | reported this, then it obviously is not Durov's fault. If you
         | are too lazy to report illegal content then you should arrest
         | yourselves first.
        
           | chucke1992 wrote:
           | Basically as he did not provide access to the encrypted
           | messages and communication in Telegram, they accused him for
           | supporting the criminals. That's all to it.
           | 
           | It is basically the part of the current politics in EU where
           | they are trying to force access to all encrypted traffic
           | across devices.
        
             | mdhb wrote:
             | Do you have any proof of this whatsoever or are you just
             | making this up?
        
               | evilfred wrote:
               | just one google away https://www.wired.com/story/the-
               | kremlin-has-entered-the-chat...
        
               | a0123 wrote:
               | Yeah, and do you think France is going to arrest Durov on
               | the Kremlin's request.
               | 
               | Fun fact: the Russian government and high ranking
               | officials are outraged by the arrest and are asking the
               | Russian state to pressure France into releasing him.
               | 
               | It's one google away. Before you blame this one on Russia
               | too.
        
           | mdhb wrote:
           | Maybe just wait a moment for things to come out through the
           | natural course of justice rather than getting yourself all
           | worked up here.
           | 
           | The accusations are serious enough that it's probably
           | reasonable to assume that they have some serious evidence for
           | this and if that is true then this is a good outcome that
           | should be celebrated.
        
             | perihelions wrote:
             | - _" probably reasonable to assume"_
             | 
             | Presumption of reasonability in political prosecutions
             | doesn't exactly have a great track record.
             | 
             | I remember when the GoF tried to blackmail a Wikipedia
             | admin with prosecution threats, to coerce them to censor
             | Wikipedia entries it didn't want people to read,
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5503354 ( _" French
             | homeland intelligence threatens a sysop into deleting a
             | Wikipedia Article (wikimedia.fr)"_)
        
               | mdhb wrote:
               | I don't know what anyone is supposed to assume from one
               | story from over a decade ago.
               | 
               | I'm just saying to slow down and wait for details to come
               | out. This thread is turning into a paranoid fever dream
               | based on nothing as far as I can tell.
        
         | alex00 wrote:
         | The extent of the accusations is evidence that all that is made
         | up in order to get access into Telegram. Telegram is too
         | important to the other side in the Ukraine war. If Telegram
         | goes, then the other side is silenced.
        
           | evilfred wrote:
           | by "other side" you mean "invaders of their sovereign
           | neighbour"
        
             | alex00 wrote:
             | Ukraine is being played in this proxy war. We are dumping
             | them as soon as they are of no use to us. Like many times
             | before.
        
         | phtrivier wrote:
         | I would be very surprised if the _trial_ was to take place
         | "very soon". (Trials hardly ever take place "very soon" in
         | France.)
         | 
         | However, I could imagine him staying in custody while being
         | investigated for a couple days, then quickly facing some level
         | of judge to decide whether he has to stay in jail or can be
         | released.
         | 
         | Once this is done, don't expect a formal trial until multiple
         | months (and most realistically, at least a year.)
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | He's a super high flight risk, so I'm thinking the
           | prosecution is going to make a pretty solid case for him
           | staying in pre-trial until trial in a year or two.
           | 
           | He's gonna have a very miserable time. Flying private jet -->
           | watching another man shitting next to you.
        
           | a0123 wrote:
           | About the custody thing, he's an extremely high flight risk.
           | If the French authorities are serious about his arrest and
           | it's not just a dumb PR move, there is absolutely no chance
           | he's going to be released. Not without 24/7 police
           | surveillance and giving up on all this passports.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | The trial will take place soon?
         | 
         | That seems very unlikely. I don't think France has a statutory
         | number of days in their speedy trial right, so even if you
         | demand trial as you walk in the door, for a serious trial of
         | this size, with this many charges, my experience is saying one
         | to two years for trial.
         | 
         | Now, France does have more rights on pre-trial detention, so he
         | might be able to get some sort of bail, but he's an enormously
         | high flight risk, so.. maybe not.
        
       | yvino wrote:
       | on what charges ?
        
         | twostorytower wrote:
         | _for his failure to cooperate in an investigation of crimes
         | perpetrated using the platform. It may be that he failed to
         | comply with lawful subpoenas._
         | 
         | That's what I read
        
         | Terretta wrote:
         | Key points:
         | 
         | - Pavel Durov, founder and CEO of Telegram, was arrested in
         | France after arriving from Azerbaijan.
         | 
         | - Durov was detained at Le Bourget Airport by the Gendarmerie
         | des Transports Aeriens (GTA) due to a French warrant.
         | 
         | - The warrant was issued on claims of Telegram's lack of
         | moderation and cooperation with law enforcement, making Durov
         | complicit in crimes such as drug trafficking, pedophilia-
         | related offenses, and fraud.
         | 
         | - Durov's arrest was contingent on him being on French
         | territory, as he is listed in the FPR (wanted persons file).
         | Unclear why he decided to land there.
         | 
         | - Durov is now in custody and will face a judge, with potential
         | charges including terrorism, drug offenses, complicity, fraud,
         | money laundering, and pedophilia-related content.
         | 
         | - Authorities believe Durov will likely be placed in pre-trial
         | detention due to his substantial financial resources and
         | perceived flight risk.
         | 
         | - The arrest aims to pressure European countries to cooperate
         | on law enforcement efforts against crimes facilitated through
         | Telegram, particularly terrorism and organized crime.
        
       | NoxiousPluK wrote:
       | This news is also what is making Toncoin go down hard currently:
       | https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/toncoin/
        
       | codedokode wrote:
       | If they want to arrest him for lack of pre-moderation, then it is
       | ridiculous.
        
         | earnesti wrote:
         | They added this wallet feature with a lot of different cryptos,
         | which implicates that they are also now providing maybe a
         | financial service. The regulation with those is heavy.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | Technically crypto wallet is a third-party app and not a part
           | of Telegram distribution.
        
             | ivanmontillam wrote:
             | Telegram's @wallet is owned by Telegram itself.
             | 
             | It's registered as a separate company, but they even share
             | some office space.
        
         | threeseed wrote:
         | In almost all countries services like this are required to
         | moderate.
         | 
         | Has been this way for decades and shouldn't be a surprise to
         | anyone.
        
       | EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
       | What would happen to the messenger? I have a lot of useful
       | connections there. And using it to read HN.
        
       | vessenes wrote:
       | Not clear right now if France thinks he was actively complicit
       | with the four horsemen listed, or if just the act of running
       | Telegram makes him complicit in their eyes, or something in the
       | middle, e.g. they asked for help and Telegram turned them down.
       | 
       | This will be an interesting case to watch -- I don't believe
       | there are any western nations that want non-locally-backdoored
       | messaging of any sort -- but generally my understanding is that
       | harassment on border entry has been the order of the day, rather
       | than arrests.
        
         | chucke1992 wrote:
         | > I don't believe there are any western nations that want non-
         | locally-backdoored messaging of any sort
         | 
         | But that's what exactly they want no? EU is literally
         | implementing a regulation that will allow to "circumvent end-
         | to-end encryption to address child sexual abuse material". I
         | believe it failed to pass recently, but they will try again -
         | and nothing stops countries to implement it independently. I
         | think France is the one who was pushing for that in the first
         | place.
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | A handful of EU MEPs keep pushing backdoored encryption and
           | it keeps getting veto'd.
           | 
           | There are two legistive bodies in the EU, one is only allowed
           | to propose law, the other is only allowed to vote on it.
           | 
           | Lots of braindead laws get put to a vote, theres no
           | requirement that they get through.
           | 
           | I understand that raising the alarm is helpful, but it would
           | be helpful if people took a second to understand how the EU
           | works, the politicians involved and how their motions are
           | perceived by the rest of parliament.
        
             | arlort wrote:
             | 3 actually, (the second body you described can be
             | categorised as bicameral)
             | 
             | Which would be pedantry if it weren't that one of the two
             | chambers is much more in line with the former
        
           | T-A wrote:
           | You might be surprised to learn who's doing the pushing:
           | 
           | https://www.wired.com/story/europes-moral-crusader-lays-
           | down...
           | 
           | https://www.statewatch.org/news/2024/july/police-should-
           | have...
        
             | a1o wrote:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children
        
           | timeon wrote:
           | > EU is literally implementing a regulation
           | 
           | Does it?
        
           | vessenes wrote:
           | I think you read my clumsy sentence backwards. They
           | absolutely want to get in the middle of messaging, all of
           | them. This is behind many of the calls for E2E interop as
           | well -- all the proposals I'm aware of call for termination
           | somewhere in the middle; you can imagine who'd like to be at
           | that termination middle point. This is why Apple will not
           | "move over" to RCS, ever, as a first class transport -- it's
           | fundamentally no more secure than OTA plaintext to existing
           | persistent threat actors.
        
           | a0123 wrote:
           | To be clear, the legislation in France and in the EU that is
           | most likely behind this arrest is that companies have to at
           | least try to do some moderation. There is an understanding
           | that not everything can be moderated (obviously, the entire
           | Internet would be banned otherwise) but there has to be a
           | genuine attempt.
           | 
           | Which every company does more or less. The fact that Telegram
           | doesn't reach this extremely low, very low bar is quite
           | something.
        
             | spwa4 wrote:
             | What keeps amazing me is that this is supposed to make
             | children's lives better, by helping social services.
             | 
             | Of course, such legislation only has any chance in hell of
             | improving lives if the standard of living for children, the
             | education, the ... IN social services is good. It is very
             | easy to see this WILL put more children into such a
             | situation, and that's about the only thing such legislation
             | will definitely do. It is completely absurd to think this
             | is going to end drugs, abuse or whatever else they're
             | looking for.
             | 
             | Is that the case? Is it the case that the standard of
             | living, education, ... in social services is good?
             | 
             | No. Not at all. There's constant scandals and if a child
             | that gets into a social services institution makes it into
             | university, just one, any given year, that's national news.
             | Prostitution in social services is common, drugs and crime
             | are everywhere.
             | 
             | It seems there is A LOT more work to be done on the other
             | side of social services first. They seem to perform VERY
             | badly once they actually catch someone. So why do this?
             | Because it isn't to help children. At the very best they
             | see this as a cheap way to look like they're improving
             | social services.
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | Telegram allows to report illegal posts; I suggest that
             | France arrests those who saw the posts but didn't report
             | them instead.
        
               | NoxiousPluK wrote:
               | To be fair, anyone that has used Telegram for a while
               | know that this is just a mock option to fool regulators.
               | You can report all you want; zero action is taken. There
               | are dozens of accounts that joined groups I'm in to spam
               | CSAM. We've reported them, kicked/banned them from the
               | group. Months later you can look them up and they're
               | still there and still active. They even post CSAM in
               | their public (visible for everyone on their profile)
               | stories.
        
               | cft wrote:
               | I tried to market something very small on Telegram and
               | was surprised how fast my account got restricted.
        
         | chad1n wrote:
         | EU has been complaining about Telegram's end-to-end encryption
         | for a long time and they want to implement some regulations to
         | basically add backdoors into all messaging apps. I don't really
         | see how this case will go on since at least private chats are
         | encrypted so Telegram (theoretically at least) can't see the
         | contents.
        
           | EduardoBautista wrote:
           | Are they going to arrest Zuckerberg and Tim Cook next for the
           | encryption in WhatsApp and iMessage?
        
             | crote wrote:
             | What makes you believe those do not have backdoors for
             | Western powers?
        
             | verisimi wrote:
             | Perhaps they already have backdoors, but don't tell
             | everyone.
        
             | rubymamis wrote:
             | Maybe not, if they already got backdoors?
        
               | sangnoir wrote:
               | If Apple hypothetically agreed to iMessage backdoors, why
               | would you trust the Telegram app updates served up by
               | Apple's app store? Western government's can pretty much
               | hack into any device they want - the only reason for
               | backdooring messaging apps would be for dragnet
               | surveillance, and I don't see big tech having the
               | appetite for the bad publicity and lawsuits that will
               | result when that inevitably becomes public
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Apple already has a kind of "backdoor": they store the
               | keys for encrypted cloud backups in their cloud as well.
               | They advertise that cloud data are encrypted but prefer
               | not to mention that they also have a key to decrypt it.
               | Even with the highest level of security [1] your contacts
               | list in Apple Cloud are not encrypted. Why? Probably
               | someone asked for this.
               | 
               | [1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651
        
             | zerodensity wrote:
             | I mean I wouldn't complain if they did.
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | They are US citizens, nobody dares to arrest them (except
             | for Russia and North Korea).
        
             | talldayo wrote:
             | No, because then they'd have to acknowledge that WhatsApp
             | and iMessage are both compromised.
        
           | vizzah wrote:
           | Private chats are a hassle to initiate and not multi-device.
           | 
           | Most use normal chats.
           | 
           | With anonymous accounts, using anonymous +888 numbers, whose
           | price has increased from $16 to $1000+ in a matter of a year,
           | it is indeed a very convenient playground for all sorts of
           | activities.
        
             | walterbell wrote:
             | In which countries are the vendors of anonymous numbers
             | located?
        
               | vizzah wrote:
               | There are no vendors, Telegram issues those numbers. So
               | it's basically a pass to create account w/o mobile number
               | requirement, if you're ready to pay for it.
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | Aren't open source apps like Jabber or Element which do not
             | require a phone number and allow to host your own server, a
             | much better playground?
        
             | popcalc wrote:
             | Security theater.
             | 
             | SimpleX is the real deal.
        
           | roomey wrote:
           | Here's the thing, all the politicians use WhatsApp.
           | 
           | They actually don't want that backdoored, guaranteed.
        
             | perihelions wrote:
             | EU politicians did (try to) explicitly exempt themselves
             | from their own chat surveillance laws,
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40063025 ( _"
             | ChatControl: EU ministers want to exempt themselves
             | (european-pirateparty.eu)"_, 202 comments)
        
               | wkat4242 wrote:
               | That makes sense though. We all know all politicians are
               | saints and would never fall prey to corruption or
               | criminal interests. /s
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | /s aside, politicians need privacy for the same reason
               | the rest of us do: they work with sensitive information
               | and it's really important they don't get blackmailed.
               | 
               | Simultaneously, they need a light shone on their private
               | lives for the same reason they want to do that to the
               | rest of us: to make sure they're not abusing their access
               | to sensitive information, getting blackmailed, or
               | otherwise being nefarious.
               | 
               | I have absolutely no idea how to fix this apparent
               | paradox. Perhaps it can't be done. Even if it can, tech
               | is unstable and this is all a moving target -- the way
               | GenAI is going, I suspect that we'll all have to carry
               | always-on cameras that log and sign everything just to
               | prove we _didn 't_ do whatever some picture or video
               | shows us doing.
        
               | wkat4242 wrote:
               | > I suspect that we'll all have to carry always-on
               | cameras that log and sign everything just to prove we
               | didn't do whatever some picture or video shows us doing.
               | 
               | Yeah good luck with that :')
               | 
               | PS: A change to "guilty until proven innocent" policy
               | would require a serious constitutional change in most
               | countries.
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | > A change to "guilty until proven innocent" policy would
               | require a serious constitutional change in most
               | countries.
               | 
               | Indeed, though there I was thinking more the court of
               | public opinion which loves hearsay and rumour.
               | 
               | The actual law? I have no idea. Tech will change the
               | world before the law can catch up with yesterday.
        
               | hagbard_c wrote:
               | That concept is as old as politics itself, the Romans
               | already stated _quod licet Iovi non licet bovi_ (What 's
               | allowable for Jupiter is not allowed for cattle), the
               | modern version of which is _rules for thee, not for me_
               | or _do as I say, not as I do_.
               | 
               | BTW, install your own XMPP server and use OMEMO-
               | compatible clients - Conversations on Android, Gajim on
               | desktop - and you get to have access to non-surveilled
               | [1]communications just like those politico's.
               | 
               | [1] assuming that your client and server devices remain
               | uncompromised, not a given if you happen to be a high-
               | value target. Caveat emptor.
        
             | ncruces wrote:
             | We've definitely had that: "official" government business
             | over WhatsApp to ensure no retention rules apply.
        
             | DAGdug wrote:
             | Yep, classic backdoor for thee, but not for me!
        
           | wkat4242 wrote:
           | Except Telegram has much less E2EE than Signal or Whatsapp.
           | 
           | It's not on by default, works only between 2 devices, they
           | both have to be online at the same time and you can't access
           | anything from the web. And group chats don't support it at
           | all. Private chats are not end to end encrypted by default
           | and it's actually quite clumsy to encrypt them so almost
           | nobody uses it.
           | 
           | It's really weird that Telegram is singled out like this.
        
             | stefan_ wrote:
             | If you don't cooperate while having the data and your
             | approach to legal compliance is "votes on your personal TG
             | channel", expect to get arrested. At least the services
             | with actual E2EE worth a shit can make a convincing
             | argument they can't produce the data.
        
             | klntsky wrote:
             | It's because it is in fact used for this, unlike say
             | whatsapp that does not enjoy any trust.
        
             | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
             | That was my first thought as well. There are good uses for
             | telegram and some things work better than signal ( API
             | comes to mind ). But just from privacy perspective,
             | telegram is much more easily neutered than signal.
             | 
             | I will admit I am confused. I can only assume something
             | else is at play.
             | 
             | edit: The only thing I can think of is that there some
             | rather gruesome channels showing Russia/Ukraine,
             | Palestine/Israel toll. I wonder if it was decided that
             | general population should not have access to these.
        
             | sangnoir wrote:
             | I can't tell if it's just uninformed grassroots mistrust of
             | big tech, or the result of astroturf PsyOps to get more
             | people to use the app with weaker encryption.
        
             | sega_sai wrote:
             | Because Telegram is not just a messenger, it's a platform
             | for distributing news/info through channels. Signal simply
             | does not have that.
        
               | wkat4242 wrote:
               | Signal and WhatsApp do have that. You can easily use
               | group chats that way, you just have to get invited. You
               | can't look for them and join them.
               | 
               | It's really easy for e.g. a drugdealer to post QR codes
               | or something on lamp posts with their contact and then
               | they can invite people. Making Telegram go away is just
               | going to hide the problem, not solve it.
        
             | hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
             | Going after the one with the least care factor first would
             | make a lot of sense, assuming their cryptographic
             | implementation is inline with their care factor.
        
             | 4bpp wrote:
             | In a way, Durov's arrest retroactively vindicates every EU
             | citizen's decision to use Telegram (up until now), as it
             | proves that they haven't been getting what they want from
             | him. I am not nearly as concerned about Durov himself or
             | the government of Dubai getting to read my messages as I am
             | about the EU or one of its member states doing so, as there
             | simply isn't much I can see the former doing with that
             | data. The real danger only arises when the people who can
             | read your messages and the people who can dispatch dudes
             | with guns to your house are in cahoots. (For the same
             | reason, I tend to roll my eyes at warnings about various
             | forms of Chinese spyware.)
        
           | heraldgeezer wrote:
           | But they recommend Signal themselves...
           | 
           | https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-commission-to-staff-
           | switc...
           | 
           | >The European Commission has told its staff to start using
           | Signal, an end-to-end-encrypted messaging app, in a push to
           | increase the security of its communications.
           | 
           | Also Telegram is not E2E by default. You need to activate it
           | per chat. By default and in groups it is only server
           | encrypted.
        
         | gtvwill wrote:
         | But here's the thing. If your app is known to be uses heavily
         | by criminals ranging from Pedo's to drug dealers. You are
         | liable. You run a carrier service. Much like the owner of
         | omegle found out, yes you do have a duty of care. You can't
         | just provide a service that knowingly provides a platform to
         | criminal activity and do jack shit. You live in fairytale land
         | if you think you can.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | What do you mean by "knowingly providing a service to a
           | criminal"? Is Elon Mask then guilty for providing access to
           | Twitter for Trump?
        
             | gtvwill wrote:
             | Well much like the owner of omegle found out you can't
             | provide platforms for criminal activities and make no
             | effort to curb it. It only takes a 30 second google before
             | you find telegram rooms offering all kinds of illegal
             | stuff. You don't find that on Twitter. Twitter is atleast
             | mildly moderated. Telegram could have moderation built in
             | to catch illegal activities but it chooses to do nothing.
             | See the difference?
        
               | chad1n wrote:
               | Telegram is end-to-end encrypted in private chats, the
               | Telegram team doesn't even know what people are
               | discussing. Same should happen with Whatsapp or Signal.
               | Should Whatsapp or Signal be accountable for what
               | terrorists talk in private?
        
               | gtvwill wrote:
               | App can have internal keyword check that could open
               | backdoor to law enforcement when certain terms are said.
               | *fbi enters the conversation* probably won't be in your
               | chat log anytime soon but you can't argue telegram,
               | signal and whatsapp can't do it. Whatsapp being fbs
               | darling almost certainly does already and signal servers
               | anti spam folder is smelling mighty like a five eyes
               | backdoor.
               | 
               | Tbh given both those apps company's have dealings with
               | gov in aus I'm gonna say signals probably already got a
               | backdoor into em. If you don't think so you don't know
               | aus law well enough or who signals are.
               | 
               | Also the owners of the apps aren't liable for the content
               | of the conversations. Their liable for providing a
               | platform for the conversation to take place and for not
               | knowingly taking available efforts to curb criminal
               | activity on that platfor/service. It's like hey I'm gonna
               | rent you a store house to hide all your illegal drugs in
               | Mr gang member. I'm not doing the hiding or anything but
               | I'm assisting the activity by providing the store house.
               | I could make efforts to curb such activity like you know
               | doing a rental inspection once every six months but I
               | choose not to and turn a blind eye. Am I assisting a
               | crime or am I completely innocent? Now repeat this but
               | telegram is the store house.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Telegram has an open-source client and is moving to
               | verifiable builds (not on every platform). You cannot
               | hide such a backdoor, and users would be able to
               | recompile a clean version of the app.
        
               | a0123 wrote:
               | The fun fact is that while Telegram won't make use of
               | something akin to PicDNA to automatically detect CSAM, it
               | will very happily take down your channel or group if you
               | distribute copyrighted material.
               | 
               | They do know how to respond to copyright complaints. Not
               | so much about other, far more serious sort of illegal
               | activities. Just on that point, they should have expected
               | something to be done against them.
        
             | gmueckl wrote:
             | Twitter already got warned about hosting Trump by the EU.
        
               | scrlk wrote:
               | That warning was not an official EU position:
               | 
               | > "Thierry Breton, the French commissioner, had posted
               | the warning letter on X, the platform owned by Musk,
               | hours before the billionaire interviewed US presidential
               | candidate Donald Trump, also on X."
               | 
               | > "On Tuesday the European Commission denied Breton had
               | approval from its president Ursula von der Leyen to send
               | the letter."
               | 
               | https://www.ft.com/content/09cf4713-7199-4e47-a373-ed5de6
               | 1c2...
               | 
               | https://archive.ph/zugnf
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Great, arrest both, I don't like them anyway.
        
           | CactusOnFire wrote:
           | By that logic, any app that provides privacy from governments
           | spying is a criminal enterprise.
        
             | zerodensity wrote:
             | Well I mean in many countries, blocking the surveillance
             | agency from listening in on your calls/texts/chats is
             | illegal. So making an app that interferes with the agencies
             | ability to "listen in" is infact a criminal enterprise.
             | 
             | Don't have to like it but the law is the law.
        
           | chad1n wrote:
           | You realize that every social media/forum/messaging app
           | should be banned then and every CEO in jail. Bad actors will
           | use anything they can.
        
             | gtvwill wrote:
             | No because those platforms make the values token effort to
             | curb illegal activity via moderation be it user performed
             | or done by their own employees. Telegram does not do this.
             | Anywhere at all. It's very different.
        
               | chad1n wrote:
               | I know chat rooms that have been nuked for Pornography
               | etc. I reported some chats where I've seen inappropriate
               | content and I received notifications that they were
               | deleted. A lot of users are muted/banned too for illegal
               | activities. It isn't exactly unmoderated, but the staff
               | can't exactly search every single server under the sun
               | for illegal material or activities. You probably don't
               | know how bad Matrix is, out of 200k servers, 70k were
               | banned for CSAM and there are still a lot of them around.
        
               | seszett wrote:
               | Last time I used Telegram and had a look at the
               | "discussions around your area" or something, I couldn't
               | find anything that wasn't about selling drugs or fake
               | documents. It was a giant drug delivery platform.
               | 
               | It might be different in other places but here, in a
               | large city of continental Europe, Telegram is definitely
               | little more than an enabler for illegal activities.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Note that selling drugs is a victimless crime. Also, you
               | could report those illegal posts, or you knowingly and
               | willingly allowed criminals to continue their activities?
        
               | seszett wrote:
               | Reporting these posts is ineffective, which is the whole
               | point of the arrest.
               | 
               | The victim of drugs is the whole society. It's only
               | "victimless" in an absolutely individualistic
               | environment, which I wouldn't even call a "society".
               | 
               | But none of this contradicts my initial comment. Telegram
               | is a straight enabler of illegal activities.
        
             | a0123 wrote:
             | The Telegram fanatics for some reason are unwilling to hear
             | it but we'll say it again: the reason why we still have an
             | Internet in 2024 is that _all_ those services at least
             | attempt _some_ form of moderation.
             | 
             | With more or less success, sure, but they can at least say
             | there is an attempt and they do take down stuff. Durov
             | pretty much brags about not doing the bare minimum.
             | 
             | It's that simple.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Telegram allows to report illegal content to moderators.
               | Jail those who saw the content but didn't report it.
               | 
               | I am sure all those claims in the media about
               | "cooperating with terrorists" is just a lie.
        
           | echelon wrote:
           | E2EE should be a human right. Period.
           | 
           | There are other ways to capture and ensnare criminals.
           | Sacrificing our privacy for the "greater good" is a bridge
           | too far.
           | 
           | As one counter point, think about all of the completely fine
           | human behaviors that instantly become kompromat when the
           | powers have access to your every communication. That is way
           | more dangerous to democracy, freedom, and liberty than a
           | slightly smaller chance of "not protecting the children".
           | 
           | Besides, if we actually cared so much about children, we
           | wouldn't let them not get school lunches, we wouldn't sell
           | them on gambling and gacha games, and we'd do a much better
           | job of educating them.
        
             | chucke1992 wrote:
             | Famous quote that if you sacrifice freedom for security,
             | you will get neither.
        
               | Terr_ wrote:
               | *sigh* Dude, if it's really that relevant and compelling,
               | you could _at least quote it properly_. I mean, it 's the
               | year 2024, finding and copy-pasting is barely slower than
               | typing a mangled paraphrase:
               | 
               | > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase
               | a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor
               | Safety.
               | 
               | _____________
               | 
               | That said, this quote is typically misused, or at best
               | being used _wayyy_ outside its original context. [0]
               | 
               | Franklin is actually talking about the their local
               | legislature's "Liberty" _to impose taxes_ , versus the
               | "Safety" of a one-time "donation" from the local oligarch
               | Penn family (of _Penn_ sylvania) who want tax-immunity
               | forever in exchange. He's saying representatives are
               | stupid for considering the deal.
               | 
               | [0] https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-0
               | 6-02-01...
        
           | vessenes wrote:
           | I upvoted your comment so that it has a bit of visibility
           | because I know some people think this, but I disagree with
           | it, very strongly.
           | 
           | First, your analogy is broken -- roads, telephones, pen and
           | paper, motor vehicles all fit your description just as aptly.
           | 
           | Second, you propose your preferred moral economy as one that
           | only curtails harms. In fact, you create another harm
           | implementing what you think is right.
           | 
           | Reasonable people disagree about which is worse -- the
           | creation and public support of a technocratic oligarchy in
           | control of how humans communicate _or_ the proliferation of
           | some harms that take advantage of unfettered communication.
           | But please don 't be simple minded, pretending to yourself or
           | others that there aren't real costs, social and physical, on
           | both sides of this.
           | 
           | For myself, I think private communications are a human right
           | and a massive good for society, and I don't condone criminal
           | acts undertaken using messaging.
        
             | Barrin92 wrote:
             | >First, your analogy is broken -- roads, telephones, pen
             | and paper, motor vehicles all fit your description just as
             | aptly.
             | 
             | and they're usually public property and policed. Routine
             | police inspection on a road and in particular control of
             | borders and key nodes in your transportation infrastructure
             | isn't exactly controversial. (unless you're part of some
             | extreme political faction). You know a lot of countries
             | where people can drive without a license plate?
             | 
             | Private communication is important but it has always had
             | limits, this crypto mentality of companies exercising no
             | compliance, having no borders, ignoring the law and
             | national security doesn't have a precedent. Historically
             | people communicated say in the US using an American
             | telecommunications network which without a doubt complied
             | with legal requests. It's not at all self evident that you
             | should tolerate telecoms infrastructure operated by a
             | Russian out of Dubai that is primarily used by an enemy
             | we're effectively at war with.
        
           | garrettgarcia wrote:
           | Why stop there? By your logic, the owners of every ISP that
           | provides a pathway for those criminal bits also should be in
           | jail. Every single organization in that pathway would be
           | liable from the registrars to the developers of web libraries
           | or other app services. The governments themselves would be
           | liable in many cases where the government has nationalized
           | internet services.
           | 
           | There is a principle in the free world that one is not
           | criminally liable for the speech of others. This is the
           | principle that allows ISP's, newspapers, web forums, Google,
           | etc. etc. to exist. You demand that the principle be violated
           | and the Internet be destroyed. I disagree.
        
         | ren_engineer wrote:
         | the EU is becoming a parody
         | 
         | >we've got to save democracy by restricting free speech and
         | enforcing laws and regulations created by unelected officials
        
           | sunaookami wrote:
           | Ever since von der Leyen became president. Typical for her
           | since she also tried the same shit in Germany.
        
             | andrepd wrote:
             | Hah! Life would be great if the EU's problems started with
             | von der Leyen
        
               | blackeyeblitzar wrote:
               | Where did it start out of curiosity?
        
               | Detrytus wrote:
               | With it's creation.
        
             | Aerroon wrote:
             | Sadly, this isn't the case.
             | 
             | I keep bringing it up since people forget about it: in 2006
             | the EU adopted the Data Retention Directive that forced all
             | ISPs to save the browsing history of everyone.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive
             | 
             | It was _eventually_ declared invalid by the European court
             | of human rights, but it was still in effect for many years.
             | Countries that did not implement this (eg Romania because
             | their constitutional court found it illegal) were sued by
             | the EU commission.
             | 
             | The EU's attempts to spy on people go back decades. You'll
             | also note that government gets exemptions from all the
             | privacy stuff the EU pushes.
             | 
             | I _hope_ the EU changes course on this, but as with their
             | handling of other tech... I 'm not holding my breath.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Is that directive the reason why website operators do not
               | want to implement ECH (Encrypted Client Hello) which
               | allows to encrypt server name in TLS connection? I tried
               | googling this, but Cloudflare blog only says that they
               | disabled ECH without disclosing the reasons: [1]
               | 
               | [1] https://community.cloudflare.com/t/early-hints-and-
               | encrypted...
        
           | Glacia wrote:
           | How arresting Durov restrict free speech?
        
           | dyauspitr wrote:
           | Unelected officials = experts
           | 
           | We don't expect our politicians to dedicate their lives to
           | scientific research so this perspective is inherently flawed.
        
             | hexxagone wrote:
             | There are experts working at the commission.
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | The detainment order was outstanding for some time, and Durov
         | certainly knew that. Still he plainly landed in France and was
         | detained. Why?
         | 
         | My pet tinfoil-hat theory is that he decided that staying in a
         | French prison is safer for him than being out in the open and
         | get some polonium, or whatnot.
        
           | alephnan wrote:
           | He has a lavish lifestyle and France is the capital of luxury
        
           | tw04 wrote:
           | >and get some polonium
           | 
           | Why would he get some polonium? There are endless official
           | Russian state telegram channels. Putin clearly has no issue
           | with it or he would have banned it.
        
           | kernal wrote:
           | > staying in a French prison is safer for him than being out
           | in the open
           | 
           | This is probably the most ridiculous theory I've read all
           | year.
        
         | mc32 wrote:
         | It'll be interesting to see if the likes of Marlinspike,
         | Firefox, EFF, etc., rally to support this guy.
         | 
         | It's really chilling to see the steps EU gobs are taking
         | against free speech. In some ways they seem more authoritarian
         | than even China and Russia. It's like "free world" is becoming
         | a farce.
        
           | jakeinspace wrote:
           | Not sure what they can do, he's worth ten times what all
           | those groups are together, so I doubt he'll have an issue
           | with legal costs.
        
           | a0123 wrote:
           | Durov has been shilling his crypto scams while shitting on
           | all those services you're talking about (well, at least
           | Signal) claiming they don't do anything for privacy.
           | 
           | Considering how he's tarnished Signal, there is absolutely no
           | reason for them or anyone else to back him up.
           | 
           | What will be very funny is the fact that Telegram is pretty
           | much not encrypted (yeah ok, "secret chats", whatever sure)
           | and now that investigators probably have access to Durov's
           | phone, that lack of encryption might come back to bite him in
           | the ass. Can't wait to know what they find and if they do
           | find something, it might be interesting to see if he finally
           | changes his stance.
        
             | foverzar wrote:
             | > well, at least Signal
             | 
             | Basically only Signal + Whatsapp.
             | 
             | > claiming they don't do anything for privacy.
             | 
             | Well, Signal is kind of a scam in that regard.
        
           | foverzar wrote:
           | Large geopolitical powers are all the same. It's only people
           | who live there that are convinced they are doing better than
           | those other guys.
           | 
           | Yes, that includes people from Russia, China or the US
           | believing they are the ones who are truly free, and
           | everything else are totalitarian shitholes. Each one of them
           | is even kind of right in their own regard.
        
       | artembugara wrote:
       | According to this source he's accused in non-cooperating. He's
       | not accused of terrorism, drug, or slaving directly.
       | 
       | Very interesting to see where it will all go.
       | 
       | I don't understand how they're going to convince French judges
       | that he's guilty for not being able to decrypt chats that he has
       | no keys for...
        
         | 42lux wrote:
         | According to which source?
        
           | artembugara wrote:
           | The one this HN post links to
        
             | Kailhus wrote:
             | See sibling comment for a more accurate description
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41341848
        
         | abcd_f wrote:
         | > _According to this source he's accused in non-cooperating._
         | 
         | With the context that you omitted it makes more sense:
         | Justice considers that the absence of moderation, cooperation
         | with        law enforcement and the tools offered by Telegram
         | (disposable numbers,       cryptocurrencies...) makes it an
         | accomplice to drug trafficking,        pedo-criminal offenses
         | and swindling.
        
           | artembugara wrote:
           | Yes you're correct.
        
         | mikae1 wrote:
         | _> not being able to decrypt chats that he has no keys for..._
         | 
         | Except he (or his corporation) has keys for almost all
         | initiated chats on the Telegram network. Only the private chats
         | are E2EE and they're not default and rather inconvenient
         | because they don't sync between devices (unlike Signal's E2EE
         | chats).
        
         | mrtksn wrote:
         | AFAIK Telegram isn't e2e for the interesting bits, that's the
         | group chats etc.
         | 
         | If I have to guess, I would say that the authorities would be
         | interested in identities of some users and access to private
         | group chats with shady stuff and Telegram would be able to
         | provide these.
         | 
         | These are probably already available to the Russian
         | intelligence considering the low radiation levels in Pavel
         | Durov's blood stream and no novichok experience.
        
       | amai wrote:
       | Maybe related:
       | 
       | ,,Putin and Telegram Founder Durov in Baku at the Same Time"
       | 
       | https://x.com/JAMnewsCaucasus/status/1825889800634733025
        
       | alex00 wrote:
       | It looks like the aim is just to compel him to give them admin
       | access to Telegram.
       | 
       | Because Telegram is the messenger that is used by the other side
       | in the Ukraine war.
       | 
       | They will invent all sorts of accusations. He will have to hand
       | over Telegram, like the other guy handed over Binance.
        
         | k1ndl1 wrote:
         | Telegram is used heavily in both Ukraine & Russia. But I doubt
         | it has anything to do with it.
        
           | alex00 wrote:
           | Between Ukraine and Russia, Telegram is the only choice for
           | Russia.
           | 
           | Ukraine has many many other options.
           | 
           | What else is there for Russians to communicate with the outer
           | world?
        
             | selivanovp wrote:
             | The problem is not with communication with the outer world.
             | The problem with other messengers is that everything you
             | type there is monitored by CIA/NSA and Ukraine has access
             | to this information. Telegram right now is the only secure
             | messenger that doesn't leak them data on Russian citizens.
        
               | evilfred wrote:
               | and the Russian govt has carte blanche access to
               | Telegram. Russia invaded their sovereign neighbour
               | Ukraine who the f cares about their forums for messaging.
               | yawn.
        
               | cpursley wrote:
               | Any source for this?
               | 
               | He hasn't lived in Russia for a decade. From what I
               | understand the reason he left is because he refused to
               | give them access. He'd prob be arrested there at the
               | airport as well.
               | 
               | I'm guessing you're in SMS-land (USofA) where telegram
               | (nor WhatsApp) never really caught on? Because telegram
               | is HUGE outside of the US and China, including Ukraine.
        
           | valianteffort wrote:
           | I watched an expose on drone use in Ukraine and it appear
           | they are using discord of all services...
        
             | alex00 wrote:
             | Bad operational security. Still it is them communicating
             | with each other using Discord. They use Telegram to
             | communicate with the masses.
        
         | jnurmine wrote:
         | Based on media reports, Telegram has been continually used by a
         | hostile autocratic government to recruit, organize and direct
         | various gray-zone attacks against Europe, on European soil.
         | 
         | Now it sounds like Europe finally put the foot down.
         | 
         | And why wouldn't they?
        
           | boutique wrote:
           | Telegram is also one of the very few places where ordinary
           | Russians can read alt-news and not only Kremlin-approved
           | propaganda. And Russia's stringent internet censorship is
           | only tightening as years go by.
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | I don't normally do this because I think it's normally bad
         | practice, but in this context it's worth noting:
         | 
         | This account seems particularly interested in the Ukraine war,
         | in particular with representing the Russian side. They've done
         | very little with this account besides post anti-Ukraine
         | content, and I would take their opinions on the Telegram-
         | Ukraine war connection with a grain of salt.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | I really have no idea why you think this is worth noting;
           | they've only posted a few times, and haven't once said a
           | negative thing about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
           | 
           | Also, you don't have to tell people to take the opinions of
           | anonymous strangers with a "grain of salt." It's weird.
        
       | afroboy wrote:
       | I hope they're not after content that goes against Israel agenda,
       | the Brave Mujahedeen in Palestine they don't have much access to
       | social media since they're banned on all mainstream platforms but
       | Telegram.
       | 
       | And i believe France with world police are going against those
       | channels.
       | 
       | Sad day to free speech.
        
         | slinky6 wrote:
         | Wouldn't be surprising if jewish power wants to shut it down
         | just like what they're doing to tiktok.
        
       | thamer wrote:
       | From the article, that's a massive pile of charges they're
       | dumping onto him, all apparently because people use Telegram in
       | ways the French state disapproves of?
       | 
       | > Why was he under threat of a search warrant? > The justice
       | department considers that the lack of moderation, lack of
       | cooperation with law enforcement, and the tools offered by
       | Telegram (disposable number, cryptocurrencies, etc.) make him an
       | accomplice to drug trafficking, pedo-criminal offenses and fraud.
        
         | mdhb wrote:
         | A French citizen running a service in France is going to be
         | subject to French laws and can expect to be arrested when they
         | step into the country of France if they have charges pending.
         | 
         | This isn't some grand conspiracy theory.
        
           | llm_trw wrote:
           | >A ~French~ Chinese citizen running a service in ~French~
           | Chinese is going to be subject to ~French~ Chinese laws and
           | can expect to be arrested when they step into the country of
           | ~French~ Chinese if they have charges pending.
           | 
           | >This isn't some grand conspiracy theory.
           | 
           | Funny that when the wrong country does it it's tyranny. When
           | a Western country does it it's the rule of law.
           | 
           | Especially when they are the exact same thing.
        
             | the_duke wrote:
             | Do you have any concrete examples where this would apply?
             | (person getting arrested in China over an offered service)
             | 
             | If not, this is just whataboutism.
             | 
             | I can't think of any, to be honest.
        
               | llm_trw wrote:
               | Please reread what I wrote.
        
               | johndunne wrote:
               | I reread what you wrote and I think it's fair to say that
               | you're deferring to a 'whataboutism'. If you can provide
               | actual examples of what you're talking about, then an
               | intellectual argument/discussion could be formed.
        
           | cdchn wrote:
           | I wonder what his gameplan was trying to become a French
           | citizen in the first place.
        
         | AshamedCaptain wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...
         | 
         | Bingo!
        
         | gtvwill wrote:
         | Well of you provide a service and it's knowingly used by
         | criminals and you just implement features to benefit the
         | criminal activity but make no effort to curb it. Yes, your an
         | accomplice.
        
           | IncandescentGas wrote:
           | Would you arrest a road worker because the highway onramp
           | they just repaved was used by bank robbers to flee the scene
           | of the crime?
        
             | seszett wrote:
             | To get the analogy straight, they would definitely arrest
             | the CEO of the roadworks company if the road was letting
             | robbers through but hindering law enforcement and the CEO
             | was refusing to make the changes legally asked of them to
             | mitigate the problem, yes.
        
             | vrc wrote:
             | If the road worker built features that specifically
             | provided an oversized benefit to the bank robbing community
             | in general, you'd definitely investigate the worker or
             | construction company
        
           | 13415 wrote:
           | Your characterization fits basically any encryption program,
           | including PGP and SSL connections by a web browser.
        
       | linotype wrote:
       | So much for "Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite". I wonder if this will
       | help push founders more to the US.
        
       | whatnotests2 wrote:
       | Is this real?
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | Yeah Reuters has it too:
         | https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/telegram-messaging-app-...
         | 
         | No source on what the warrant is about though.
         | 
         | FWIW I really like Telegram and pay for it, I hope it will get
         | cleared up soon.
        
       | k1ndl1 wrote:
       | Durov has a French passport, so he will be charged as a French
       | citizen. What is weird is that he sure knew that he was on the
       | watchlist in France, though he has chosen to go there. Why?
        
         | artembugara wrote:
         | I don't understand how his passport changes the whole thing?
         | 
         | France can and will charge anyone on its territory no matter
         | what passport you hold.
        
           | martinbaun wrote:
           | Usually courts are a lot more lenient with foreign citizens.
           | Try to get jailed in Mexico as an French citizen - pretty
           | hard unless you do obvious bad stuff.
        
             | qingcharles wrote:
             | From what I've seen, it's the opposite. Nobody wants an
             | outsider coming into their territory and committing a
             | crime. And it also makes you a flight risk, so that's going
             | to factor badly into any pre-trial detention.
        
         | qayxc wrote:
         | Hybris. Some people once they have reached a certain level of
         | status and wealth see themselves as untouchable.
        
       | codedokode wrote:
       | They claim that criminals use Telegram, but it is not the best
       | choice for doing crime because Telegram requires a phone number
       | to sign up, and a phone number can be linked to identity and full
       | location history (telcos record full location history for every
       | number).
       | 
       | However, Telegram might be involved in cooperating with
       | criminals; for example by not deleting channels related to
       | protests against government at govt's request, by not blocking
       | channels of allegedly spreading misinformation Western media like
       | BBC. This is indeed illegal in Russia.
        
         | rcxdude wrote:
         | Also it's e2e is a bit of a joke because it's so easy to fall
         | back to the non-e2e path (basically no-one uses it)
        
         | mdhb wrote:
         | You seem to be rather confused about the current thinking and
         | capabilities of criminal groups.
         | 
         | Requiring a phone number most certainly isn't some fool proof
         | method in the way you are claiming.
        
         | 0x_rs wrote:
         | Fraudsters have access to a near-infinite supply of phone
         | numbers. It is only an annoyance for the average user trying to
         | legitimately access a service and only helps prevent the
         | smallest and least prepared criminals. But it's true that for
         | 1:1 communication or not having to reach a broad audience there
         | should be better alternatives.
        
         | tokai wrote:
         | Prepaid sim cards, bought with cash by mules, make the phone
         | number requirement completely inefficient.
        
       | lovegrenoble wrote:
       | Russophobia in all its glory...
        
       | oligarchdemon wrote:
       | Imagine if he was arrested in Russia. The narrative would be he's
       | a hero, not a pedo enabler.
        
       | kkfx wrote:
       | Many people outside AND INSIDE France still have not much
       | understood that the current government have transformed a step at
       | a time the Republic in a ready-for-a-full-coup fascist state, for
       | those who can read french I suggest trying:
       | 
       | - https://www.senat.fr/leg/tas22-148.pdf page 43 bottom, or
       | searching "requisition de toute personne"
       | 
       | - https://www.senat.fr/leg/pjl22-569.pdf with a good intervention
       | from an LFI MEP, Ugo Bernalicis who is DEFINITIVELY worth to hear
       | https://youtu.be/PDG9V01jPUs
       | 
       | Just to cite the relatively recent more stunning move. But there
       | was many in the less recent past (starting from police
       | surveillance, impunity and so on) not counting the current delay
       | to DENIED the last legislative elections results...
        
         | aucisson_masque wrote:
         | https://www.francetvinfo.fr/replay-radio/le-vrai-du-faux/le-...
        
           | kkfx wrote:
           | I've linked the laws actually existing, anyone can read
           | what's in and take a personal conclusion. These laws are
           | clearly a base for a coup, no matter how PR rhetoric can try
           | to justify that.
        
       | mmsc wrote:
       | Just think: all the companies that do illegal shit and get slaps
       | on the wrist with a few thousand/million dollar fines. That's the
       | only "consequence" for the executives that blew up the economy in
       | 2008, the politicians that are in cahoots with company executives
       | to funnel money into their pockets, the companies that spy on
       | their own employees without due diligence or cause, the producers
       | of products that knowingly cause cancer, the producers of
       | medicine that knowingly destroys lives, the decision-makers that
       | destroy engineering standards resulting in airplanes falling from
       | the skies with hundreds of helpless people being blown to pieces,
       | and the companies that destroy the planet with actions that can
       | never be reversed.
       | 
       | And instead they arrest the CEO of a company that provides a
       | mechanism for people to talk to one another.
        
         | ProAm wrote:
         | We can be honest and the government realizes that it's not just
         | talking. At least for the conversations they are concerned
         | about. *EDIT* I dont agree with it, but Ive seen governments do
         | far worse with far less.
        
           | rdmreader3319 wrote:
           | I can assure you they are not concerned by illegal drugs and
           | crime as every single french city is gangrened by drug
           | dealers and thugs. But they really don't like free speech.
        
             | ProAm wrote:
             | Governments want control and intelligence. Im not saying
             | the did this legally or valid like but I can see exactly
             | why they did it. Same with Assange... The government was
             | tired of dealing with his bs, legal or not.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | Telegram is not a police and not a court though; it doesn't
           | need to search and identify illegal content. And how can you
           | call something illegal without court's decision?
        
           | underlogic wrote:
           | Ok let's arrest some telco CEOs. Plenty of criminals still
           | call
        
           | llm_trw wrote:
           | And you can send encrypted SD cards through the mail.
           | 
           | Arrest all postwomen.
        
             | ProAm wrote:
             | Governments want control and intelligence. Im not saying
             | the did this legally or valid like but I can see exactly
             | why they did it. Same with Assange... The government was
             | tired of dealing with his bs, legal or not.
        
           | mmsc wrote:
           | Airlines do not search people's baggage for drugs. Postage
           | services do not search people's packages for drugs.
        
             | ProAm wrote:
             | Governments want control and intelligence. Im not saying
             | the did this legally or valid like but I can see exactly
             | why they did it. Same with Assange... The government was
             | tired of dealing with his bs, legal or not.
        
         | martinbaun wrote:
         | Can't have people talking to eachother, they might find out
         | something they shouldnt.
        
       | yangff wrote:
       | humor
        
       | flumpcakes wrote:
       | The quality of posts in this thread are unusually low for Hacker
       | News. Is this place being brigaded? Extremely uncharitable
       | readings and frankly conspiracy theories everywhere.
        
       | wkat4242 wrote:
       | Edit: Oops it was already posted, sorry. I should have known. I
       | checked but I forgot to check the 'new' page :( My apologies.
       | 
       | FWIW I really like Telegram, I hope it will get cleared up soon.
        
         | lovegrenoble wrote:
         | Already deleted...
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41341353
        
           | enlyth wrote:
           | Not deleted, just suddenly demoted to the 4th page. It's that
           | broken HN algorithm that randomly messes up the front page
           | for no reason.
        
             | lolinder wrote:
             | Otherwise known as the flame war detector, which does a
             | decent job of keeping flame wars off the front page but
             | occasionally has to be fixed by a mod when it kicks in
             | incorrectly.
             | 
             | Moderation is hard, and HN actually does a pretty good job
             | all things considered.
             | 
             | Edit: it's already back.
        
               | perihelions wrote:
               | It pains me to agree, but this is quite right: for every
               | important developing story that gets erased like this,
               | there's like 500 nonsense flamewars that guaranteed you
               | don't want to read, that get erased by the same
               | heuristic. It's genuinely tuned well.
               | 
               | (I'll never agree with HN's title-editing bot though.
               | That thing's cray).
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | Hah, agreed on the title editing bot.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | (This was originally posted in aother thread
         | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41341873) that we merged
         | hither.)
        
       | vizzah wrote:
       | A most likely outcome now is that a deal will be made to avoid
       | jail time and he'll let EU do the backdoors or whatever they were
       | asking politely first.
       | 
       | Telegram has also tried to distance itself from TON crypto token,
       | but it is so obvious how it still serves the original Durov's
       | vision and controlled by a team of founders (aka initial token
       | holders), now proofing their stakes for a supposedly
       | decentralized blockchain to operate.
       | 
       | It's not a wise idea to run "uncensored" messenger where a lot of
       | shit happens and also offer it's users built-in non-government-
       | surveilled payment methods.
        
       | martinbaun wrote:
       | Another reason not to go to France. It was once such a beautiful
       | country
        
       | antibios wrote:
       | There are many parts to government but the French are actually
       | sponsors of matrix. So one would have believed that they agreed
       | with secure communications.
       | 
       | https://element.io/case-studies/tchap
        
       | mynegation wrote:
       | And now this story has disappeared from the HN home page
        
         | malfist wrote:
         | It's literally #2 right now
        
       | felurx wrote:
       | Not directly related to the arrest, but to Durov:
       | 
       | His Telegram channel is somewhat odd. It's a mix of what you'd
       | expect (updates / general stuff about Telegram), some slightly
       | weird stuff (highly praising countries he visited or talking
       | about his oh-so-high-quality sperm and how he's the biological
       | father of "over 100" kids), and then there's just shilling for
       | some random watch-ads-to-get-coins things or whatever that
       | totally aren't scams built on Telegram's new mini-app thing and
       | TON (which is Telegram's cryptocurrency that they can't legally
       | sell as theirs). You can take a look for yourself here:
       | https://t.me/s/durov
        
         | souvlakee wrote:
         | He's an interesting but odd man. It's rare to see him fully
         | dressed on his Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/durov. I
         | expected him to remove his clothes during Carlson's interview,
         | but he didn't.
        
           | iscoelho wrote:
           | It definitely takes effort to stay that fit. Nothing wrong
           | with being proud of the way you look (:
        
         | iscoelho wrote:
         | 1) Updates/general makes sense as you say.
         | 
         | 2) "Praising countries" aka focusing on increasing the reach of
         | Telegram, similar to Zuckerberg with Facebook.
         | 
         | 3) "biological father of "over 100" kids" is quite the mildly
         | interesting fact. It's unsurprising for an individual in his
         | position to be a little eccentric.
         | 
         | 4) "shilling for some random watch-ads-to-get-coins" aka
         | focusing on increasing engagement with the Telegram app
         | ecosystem that directly benefits Telegram.
         | 
         | All make sense to me.
        
         | hello_computer wrote:
         | Jack, Pavel, Zucc... all security-state agents, just different
         | states. Anything centralized, or at least centrally
         | intermediated is full-blown AIDS. I don't like _why_ they
         | arrested him, but he had it coming regardless.
        
       | TacticalCoder wrote:
       | Next thing you know the UK is going to arrest Elon Musk for he
       | let people complain about the rate of rapes and killings going up
       | in the UK.
       | 
       | Or maybe the EU is going to arrest Elon Musk for he refused the
       | mafia-tactic of the EU commission (where they offered him a
       | bargain: _" Let us censor any content we want and in exchange we
       | promise no fines"_).
       | 
       | Both the EU and the UK are on very dangerous trajectories: they
       | are falling into totalitarian states at an alarmingly fast pace.
       | 
       | Actually: I do think they're already totalitarian states.
       | 
       | As an EU citizen I'm looking at my options to buy passports and
       | GTFO of here.
        
       | mrinfinitiesx wrote:
       | While on the subject of Telegram, check this out:
       | https://github.com/simplex-chat
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | "100% private" claims always make me incredibly suspicious
         | since it is impossible to achieve that. Security is a matter of
         | threat modeling against an expected adversary and nothing
         | protects against a serious interest from a state level actor.
         | 
         | This is why I don't really care that Telegram doesn't do E2EE
         | by default. Most of my chats aren't that interesting and in my
         | threat model it's good enough.
        
           | mrinfinitiesx wrote:
           | I don't disagree. It's just another messenger. Just a 'check
           | it out'
        
       | ndarray wrote:
       | Why was the other thread removed? It was #1 on the main page.
        
         | _Microft wrote:
         | The discussion you are thinking about is neither dead nor
         | flagged. Overly active discussions get downranked
         | automatically:
         | 
         | ,, _Other factors affecting rank include user flags, anti-abuse
         | software,_ software which demotes overheated discussions,
         | _account or site weighting, and moderator action._ ", see
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
        
           | 627467 wrote:
           | so. why not this one?
        
       | theAkomolafe wrote:
       | This is an insanely big developing story.
        
         | deadmutex wrote:
         | > This is an insanely big developing story.
         | 
         | For people in tech
        
           | option wrote:
           | Telegram is used by hundreds of millions in Europe and Middle
           | East
        
             | fieryscribe wrote:
             | And East Asia, especially Hong Kong since 2019.
        
             | deadmutex wrote:
             | Yep, and I have yet to see evidence of this being a huge
             | story for those people. He's no Messi or Bieber or Swift.
        
               | foverzar wrote:
               | > I have yet to see evidence of this being a huge story
               | for those people
               | 
               | Can you honestly claim that you keep in touch with those
               | people?
               | 
               | I mean, this is an english-speaking us-centric forum. It
               | is somewhat atypical for people here to actually know
               | what happens outside this bubble.
        
       | EugeneOZ wrote:
       | 3 of his kids are in Moscow. Under Putin's control.
       | 
       | Pavel Durov tries to play the "victim" to create a legitimate
       | image for himself and Telegram.
        
         | boutique wrote:
         | Self-admittedly he has over 100 children. OTOH, Telegram's DCs
         | are in: the US, the Netherlands and in Singapore [0] and he was
         | just arrested in the EU.
         | 
         | So I don't follow how you've made a connection between Putin
         | and (Putin's?) "(fake?) victim" Durov.
         | 
         | [0] https://docs.pyrogram.org/faq/what-are-the-ip-addresses-
         | of-t...
        
       | evilfred wrote:
       | telegram is compromised by Russia
       | https://www.wired.com/story/the-kremlin-has-entered-the-chat...
        
         | sunaookami wrote:
         | Says a US mouthpiece. These discussion get so tiring.
        
       | heraldgeezer wrote:
       | What about Signal?
       | 
       | What about Messenger and Whatsapp, also end-to-end encrypted?
       | 
       | Will they be arrested?
       | 
       | Is this the end of end-to-end encryption chats?
        
       | heraldgeezer wrote:
       | EU themselves recommend Signal. That is even stronger as it is
       | end-to-end encrypted by default.
       | 
       | https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-commission-to-staff-switc...
       | 
       | >The European Commission has told its staff to start using
       | Signal, an end-to-end-encrypted messaging app, in a push to
       | increase the security of its communications.
        
         | bigbones wrote:
         | Except for any media you post which end up as a unique key
         | behind CloudFlare or Google Cloud load balancers. They may not
         | reveal your chats, but they certainly export your metadata
         | (i.e. list of devices fetching and putting a key) to the worst
         | possible parties
        
       | compiler1410 wrote:
       | From my experience those charges are valid and well deserved. As
       | a Telegram user since 2015, I've spent 2 years actively reporting
       | groups and individuals in posession of explicit materials
       | involving children and animals. Some of my friends have also
       | joined me in this effort. Unfortunately, Telegram never banned
       | any of those groups and individuals which is a textbook case of
       | not only being an accessory to crime, but also being complicit in
       | letting the crime go on.
        
       | ein0p wrote:
       | "You'll wear yourselves out swallowing dust, running around the
       | courts to unblock the assets." (c) Vladimir Putin when persuading
       | Russian oligarchs to repatriate their wealth. Turns out he was
       | right.
        
       | gck1 wrote:
       | Funny story - there were some protests in my country some months
       | ago. We're a semi-autocratic country on the verge of becoming a
       | dictatorship. During the protests, the government used masked
       | 'civilians,' or what you'd call 'titushkis,' to beat up activists
       | at their home addresses or elsewhere in public. We were also
       | getting calls from fake numbers on our personal numbers with
       | threats.
       | 
       | A channel was created on Telegram by a government propaganda
       | journalist, where they basically dox every activist, posting
       | their addresses, phone numbers, and other private details, at
       | times when these details are actively used for beating people to
       | near death. That's the only content that Telegram channel
       | produces.
       | 
       | I was one of the people whose details were posted on that
       | channel. My phone number, home address, etc., were posted there,
       | along with the private details of tens of others. I contacted
       | Telegram support multiple times, we mass reported the channel -
       | not once have I gotten an answer, and the entire channel is still
       | up, for nearly 4 months.
       | 
       | So, hearing that he's arrested for lack of moderation? Good. I'm
       | very happy. Hope he learns a lesson.
       | 
       | EDIT: Country is Georgia
        
         | mmsc wrote:
         | In case anybody was wondering, OP is talking about Georgia the
         | country.
        
         | floam wrote:
         | Ukraine? That's the only context I've read the term titushkis.
         | But those were used against Euromaiden protesters and with what
         | happened since, plus the given n month timelines, that just
         | doesn't make sense.
        
           | gck1 wrote:
           | Georgia. They used same tactics, so that's why I also call
           | them titushkis.
        
           | Svoka wrote:
           | Titushki is tool of russian world politicians to deal with
           | descent. They are used all over the place.
        
         | cypress66 wrote:
         | What you call moderation is also a tool dictatorships use to
         | censor people. It goes both ways.
        
           | bryant wrote:
           | > What you call moderation is also a tool dictatorships use
           | to censor people. It goes both ways.
           | 
           | The veracity of this claim aside, posting this as a reply to
           | someone who just shared their own experience getting doxxed
           | in a country where victims have legitimate grounds to fear
           | for their lives... feels a little out of place.
           | 
           | Also, usually the dictatorships abuse the censors once their
           | grasp is firm. Until then, they're typically abusing the lack
           | of censorship for their own ends. We see that here in the US
           | with troll farms abusing limited content moderation around
           | misinformation to sway public opinion with falsehoods.
           | Countries are trying to pull the US election in both
           | directions right now this way.
        
           | gck1 wrote:
           | Since perchlorate's comment is now dead, and yours is
           | similar, going to reply here.
           | 
           | I do agree to some extent. Having tools to challenge a
           | dictatorship that cannot be silenced can indeed become
           | invaluable. However, there is a significant difference
           | between responsible moderation, which aims to protect
           | individuals' safety, and full-blown censorship. While it can
           | be a slippery slope, the absence of moderation shouldn't
           | leave users defenseless against doxxing and threats, which
           | can have real, harmful, and even deadly consequences. There
           | must be some form of balance. From my experience, it feels
           | like Telegram lacks any moderation whatsoever, which
           | represents another extreme. I assume, though, that they must
           | be enforcing some level of moderation for things like CP,
           | since governments typically, really do not tolerate a no
           | moderation policy in such areas.
           | 
           | I would say that being on this extreme end, Telegram has
           | actually opened itself up to government scrutiny. If there
           | had been some form of responsible moderation, governments
           | might not have found enough grounds to justify their actions.
           | The absence of any moderation means that governments can use
           | full force and indeed justify it, potentially damaging the
           | very area of free speech that Telegram aims to protect.
        
         | a0123 wrote:
         | This and the sexual blackmail the network fully permits.
         | Although it's my understanding they have been doing slightly
         | better when it comes down to children (the fact it was made
         | possible in the first place is unbelievable though).
         | 
         | Not counting the pro-Israeli channels posting details of anti-
         | genocide activists and encouraging violence (and sometimes
         | openly putting bounties on activists' heads). All constantly
         | reported yet no action is taken.
         | 
         | There have been so many things this guy has allowed for years,
         | believing he could act (or fail to act) with total impunity
         | because of his fortune. Hell, he got offered a French passport
         | because Macron used to be a big Telegram fan (might still be).
         | It's absolutely incredible he was so brazen he would just
         | travel to France because there is absolutely no way he wasn't
         | aware he could be held liable (especially considering recent EU
         | legislation), he probably just believed he was above the law.
        
         | hintymad wrote:
         | Wouldn't in this case the culprit is that Georgia didn't have
         | rule of law? Yes, Telegram didn't help and ignored your plea,
         | but prosecuting the owner for the presumed malice? I'm not sure
         | how that will go well in the long run.
        
         | Grammrr wrote:
         | And what app was used by the protestors to communicate with one
         | another?
        
         | Svoka wrote:
         | Unfortunately telegram actively engaging with russian
         | govenment. Since 2022 it became nothing but a propaganda tool
         | itself.
        
         | mrtksn wrote:
         | No moderation + anonymity is very nasty.
         | 
         | IMHO people unfairly come on you about your expectation for
         | moderation.
         | 
         | What often happens is, you lose your anonymity and get
         | personally attacked by people in position of impunity.
         | 
         | That should not be a thing.
        
       | vzaliva wrote:
       | Well, this is the consequence of Telegram's poor privacy choices.
       | Most chats are not end-to-end encrypted, and they could have
       | access to their content. This makes them liable when they refuse
       | governments' requests for such information. It also raises the
       | question of whether they have given such access to other
       | governments like Russia (coincidentally, Durov was in Baku at the
       | same time Putin was visiting, and there is speculation that they
       | may have met).
       | 
       | In contrast, Signal does not have access to any chats or user
       | information (except the timestamp of when users last logged in)
       | and could not be forced to wiretap.
        
       | qingcharles wrote:
       | They went full Ulbricht on him: terrorism, drugs, fraud, money
       | laundering, piracy and involvement with child exploitation.
        
       | sergiotapia wrote:
       | I'm already never travelling to England. Will I also add France
       | to that list? We'll see.
        
       | cabirum wrote:
       | The "free world" took a new hostage.
        
         | compiler-devel wrote:
         | Indeed. I wouldn't travel to France, the UK, or any other
         | oppressive regime in these times.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | We changed the URL from https://www.tf1info.fr/justice-faits-
       | divers/info-tf1-lci-le-... to an article in English. If there's a
       | better article in English, we can change it again.
        
         | jfim wrote:
         | One detail that's missing from the English article is why he
         | got arrested.
         | 
         | The French article mentions:
         | 
         | Why was he under threat of a search warrant?
         | 
         | The Justice considers that the absence of moderation,
         | cooperation with law enforcement and the tools offered by
         | Telegram (disposable numbers, cryptocurrencies...) makes him an
         | accomplice to drug trafficking, child-crime offenses and
         | swindling.
        
           | squidbeak wrote:
           | > TF1 and BFM both said the investigation was focused on a
           | lack of moderators on Telegram, and that police considered
           | that this situation allowed criminal activity to go on
           | undeterred on the messaging app.
           | 
           | (From the reuters link)
        
           | nextos wrote:
           | Does this mean that according to EU, or France, E2E-encrypted
           | platforms need to "cooperate" (provide backdoors)?
           | 
           | Or does it refer to public channels only?
        
           | mouse_ wrote:
           | So they're going for the ISPs too, then? Considering the drug
           | traffickers, child crime offenders and swindlers were
           | actually paying the ISPs, NOT telegram.
        
           | tamimio wrote:
           | Just because he is the CEO doesn't mean he is directly
           | liable. The company is a separate entity. I don't see anyone
           | arresting Elon or other CEOs because of "not enough
           | moderation." Most actions are to block platform access. There
           | must be something else for sure.
        
         | NoxiousPluK wrote:
         | Thank you! There was no English article yet when I first posted
         | this.
         | 
         | There is now also
         | https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/telegram-messaging-app-...
        
         | cft wrote:
         | Still interesting why it's only #8 on the front page, whereas
         | higher posts have a lower votes per hour rate
        
           | compiler1410 wrote:
           | jannies being jannies
        
         | compiler1410 wrote:
         | >Billionaire CEO named namedson
         | 
         | This isn't Slayers X.
         | 
         | But on a serious note if he's a billionaire then he can drop
         | the whole monetization schtick. Telegram has become unusuable
         | in the last few years. There's crypto scam ads everywhere.
        
       | sega_sai wrote:
       | A bunch of people in comments here seem to misunderstand what
       | telegram is. It is _not_ just a messaging app, it is essentially
       | a platform like twitter, with channels, hundreds of thousands of
       | subscribers to those. While I fully support E2EE communication
       | with no back-doors, I think it is perfectly fair for governments
       | to have some control to take down large channels that are clearly
       | against the law. I do not know the true cause for the arrest, but
       | I hope it is because of the latter not the former.
        
       | megous wrote:
       | Coincidentally or not, yesterday there was another sweeping ban
       | of various Palestine related channels on Telegram across EU:
       | 
       | https://x.com/SamidounPP/status/1827062901364208099
       | 
       | So not sure what's the "terrorist" thing about, since various
       | info channels definitely get blocked on telegram in EU. I can't
       | for the life of me as an EU "citizen" even figure out who asks
       | for these bans on behalf of the EU. Kinda doubt it's someone in
       | my country, because it's reported as EU wide ban in this case.
       | Maybe it's done by some overbearing country on this particular
       | topic, like Germany, and Telegram just blocked it EU wide, for
       | some reason.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-24 23:00 UTC)