quaff

Telegram needs to enable e2ee by default, cause the way it is now, you may as well not have it.

I mean that is a fair point. But open source client only matters if people were using Telegram’s secret chats consistently. The closed source server is what’s most important when almost all communication happens plain text.

You can hide your phone number now with the release of usernames in Signal. Still need it for registration tho.

I suspect that’s because Telegram’s marketing and it’s users consistently try to place Telegram in the same categories as actually secure and encrypted messengers. Whereas I don’t see tech blogs claiming that FB messenger is secure.

Good catch 🫡

Maybe it’s different on Android or Desktop/Web. On iOS it’s more than 2 clicks. And it’s tucked away. It would be surprising to me if the UI is that inconsistent across different platforms. But I can’t know for sure. So I will defer to the subject matter experts on Telegram.

It’s 100% not just two clicks. You make it sound easier than it really is. But there’s no way for a new or infrequent user to know where it is unless they explore a bit or even knew to look for it. It’s hidden away behind a hamburger menu.

In my OP, I was merely referring to how FB Messenger and Telegram functions the same.

Speaking to the protocol used for encryption is a moot point… because even if MTProto 2 was better, it’s still not enabled by default in both messengers.

Right. But it’s also not exactly “easy” which is what you’re saying it is.

If easy was a sliding scale. Easy would be enabled by default. Hard would be making it obscure and hard to find. I would say it’s definitely closer to the harder to find side. But that’s just me. But 3 clicks, and having to switch chats and maybe delete the old one to avoid confusion, none of that is easy.

Ah good point, gotta delete the old unencrypted chat too to avoid confusion. That’s definitely more than just 3 clicks.

If you’re talking to 30 people, it’s 90 clicks. It might be 3 clicks if you know where to look, but end of the day, even if you know where to find it, that’s still that many clicks times how many people you chat with. It’s not ideal. I wouldn’t say it’s complicated sure, but it’s not easy.

Yeah, the fact that FB messenger uses Signal protocol, means the encryption is better recognized than the one used in Telegram. But the lack of on-by-default or the need to drill in a few options before enabling secret chats… I mean it’s even named the same thing as Telegram.

It’s three clicks. And it opens a separate chat from the existing one. It’s obscure enough that you could say the UX deprioritizes (which at best is not an actively malicious design choice) usage of end-to-end encryption.

If Telegram is considered an encrypted messenger, then FB messenger should be too. Works exactly the same. I don’t know about you, but being the same level as FB messenger should speak volumes to whether Telegram is “encrypted” or not 🙄

Are there any updates regarding microphone and Touch ID support in this release?

I removed mine since I moved away from Gitlab. There’s other comments with working docker composes, but here’s the latest working version of mine if you’re interested:

services:
  gluetun:
    image: ghcr.io/qdm12/gluetun:latest
    container_name: gluetun
    # line above must be uncommented to allow external containers to connect. See https://github.com/qdm12/gluetun/wiki/Connect-a-container-to-gluetun#external-container-to-gluetun
    restart: always
    cap_add:
      - NET_ADMIN
    devices:
      - /dev/net/tun:/dev/net/tun
    volumes:
      - ./data:/gluetun
    environment:
      ## ProtonVPN Wireguard
      - VPN_SERVICE_PROVIDER=custom
      - VPN_TYPE=wireguard
      - VPN_ENDPOINT_IP=${WIREGUARD_ENDPOINT_IP}
      - VPN_ENDPOINT_PORT=${WIREGUARD_ENDPOINT_PORT}
      - WIREGUARD_PUBLIC_KEY=${WIREGUARD_PUBLIC_KEY}
      - WIREGUARD_PRIVATE_KEY=${WIREGUARD_PRIVATE_KEY}
      - WIREGUARD_ADDRESSES=${WIREGUARD_ADDRESSES}
      - TZ=Etc/UTC
    ports:
      - ${QBITTORRENT_EXPOSED_WEBUI_PORT}:8080/tcp # qBittorrent Web UI

  qbittorrent:
    # https://docs.linuxserver.io/images/docker-qbittorrent
    build: .
    container_name: qbittorrent
    restart: always
    volumes:
      - ./config:/config
      # using download path as mount so other services can play nice
      - ${QBITTORRENT_DOWNLOAD_PATH}:${QBITTORRENT_DOWNLOAD_PATH}
      - ${QBITTORRENT_THEMES_PATH}:/themes
    environment:
      # https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-qbittorrent#umask-for-running-applications
      - PUID=${QBITTORRENT_WRITE_UID}
      - PGID=${QBITTORRENT_WRITE_GID}
      - UMASK=0002
      - TZ=Etc/UTC
      - WEBUI_PORT=8080
    network_mode: "service:gluetun"
    depends_on:
      gluetun:
        condition: service_healthy

  portcheck:
    image: eiqnepm/portcheck:latest
    container_name: portcheck
    restart: always
    environment:
      - QBITTORRENT_PORT=6881
      - QBITTORRENT_WEBUI_PORT=8080
      - QBITTORRENT_WEBUI_SCHEME=http
      - QBITTORRENT_USERNAME=admin
      - QBITTORRENT_PASSWORD=${QBITTORRENT_ADMIN_PASSOWRD}
      - TIMEOUT=300
      - DIAL_TIMEOUT=5
    network_mode: "service:gluetun"
    depends_on:
      qbittorrent:
        condition: service_healthy

Does anyone happen to have an invite they could throw my way? 👀

Love Steam for that. That reminds me… gotta get me a Steam Deck!

Honestly. I suspect in this scenario, the popular use case for enabling Resizable Bar is for gaming. I was hoping to improve my video transcoding experience. 🥸

For sure haha I meant I don’t have soldering skills. I know there’s a hardware BIOS programmer device I could get, but I feel like at that point, I may as well get a new motherboard 👀