Telegram founder Pavel Durov recently criticized the encrypted messaging app Signal, claiming that its privacy mechanisms were nothing more than a “circus trick.” However, Durov’s own history with Signal and Telegram’s privacy credentials make it difficult to take his comments seriously.
Durov has been throwing stones at Signal for years, even predicting in 2017 that a backdoor would be found in their protocol within five years. However, his prediction has proven to be false. Furthermore, Signal founder Moxie Marlinspike once suggested that Telegram should not be considered an encrypted messaging app.
Given the historical rivalry between the two platforms, Durov’s recent comments appear to be more of an opportunistic attack on a market competitor rather than a genuine concern about backdoored software.
Signal faced scrutiny after Signal Foundation Chair Katherine Maher made controversial comments about Wikipedia. This controversy allowed Durov to redirect the anger towards Signal itself. Signal quickly dispelled the claims and provided important context to address the issue.
Although things have settled down for now, this rivalry is far from over and has the potential to become the cybersecurity version of Kendrick v. Drake.
There is an emerging anti-Signal sentiment in certain circles, which is surprising considering Signal’s reputation as one of the most respected messaging apps in the world. This sentiment may have originated when Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News anchor, appeared on Lex Fridman’s Podcast and expressed doubts about Signal’s security.
Interestingly, Carlson interviewed Pavel Durov in April, and a month later, Durov claimed that key figures had informed him that their “private” Signal messages had been exploited. Carlson is likely one of the important people Durov mentioned.
While Telegram has tried to position itself as an encrypted messaging app, it falls short compared to Signal. Telegram lacks end-to-end encryption by default and does not offer end-to-end encrypted group chats. This means that the majority of Telegram users are left without adequate protection.
Despite these limitations, Durov continues to amplify doubts about Signal to promote Telegram. Further conflict between the two platforms is highly likely.
Signal has not publicly supported Maher’s comments, emphasizing that politics do not matter when it comes to trust in the app. Signal’s highly audited and open-source code provides a relatively trustless model.
However, there are alternative messaging apps, such as Session, that operate on decentralized networks. Session’s open-source code allows users to verify its authenticity and run it themselves, eliminating the need for trust.
However, decentralized networks have their own limitations, particularly when it comes to complex key ratcheting. This makes it difficult to achieve the unique cryptographic properties offered by the Signal Protocol.
In the end, there is always a trade-off when it comes to messaging apps. No app has it all, and anyone claiming to do so likely has something to sell.
Alexander Linton, director of the encrypted messaging app Session, emphasizes the importance of considering different factors when choosing a messaging app. This article provides general information and does not constitute legal or investment advice. The author’s views do not necessarily reflect those of Cointelegraph.