Friend
Professional
- Messages
- 2,653
- Reaction score
- 850
- Points
- 113
Data protection or a threat to society? Find the truth yourself.
Data privacy and user protection are among the most important issues in modern messengers. Signal and Telegram are two of the more popular apps that offer different approaches to this problem. Despite the fact that both messengers claim to protect the privacy of their users, their methods differ significantly, which affects the perception of these platforms by users and regulators.
This excerpt from Signal's policy emphasizes their commitment to data minimization, which means that they can only provide authorities with minimal information without revealing any of the content of the messages.
Signal not only guarantees privacy, but also has a clear no-moderation policy. Since all data is encrypted on users' devices, the company does not have access to their content, which excludes the possibility of any moderation. This makes Signal safe in terms of privacy, but at the same time limits the ability to combat illegal content.
This snippet explains how Telegram uses a distributed infrastructure to store data, allowing it to avoid sole control by any one jurisdiction. However, this also means that data may be available in certain circumstances.
Telegram emphasizes that, despite its architecture, they have not yet shared any user data with third parties. However, it is important to note that the platform can technically do this if it is forced to.
This excerpt indicates that Telegram does not consider requests to disclose data on private chats and groups, potentially allowing members of these groups to share illegal content without the risk of detection.
This excerpt shows that Telegram only moderates public channels, leaving private chats and groups out of control. This has led to increased criticism of the platform, especially from human rights organizations and regulators.
In the case of Signal, this problem does not arise because the platform does not have access to the content of users messages at all. However, this also means that Signal cannot help in the fight against illegal content, which is sometimes a concern for law enforcement.
Telegram came under scrutiny from French authorities after it refused to provide information about a user accused of creating and distributing CSAM. This case raises important questions about the boundaries of privacy and the responsibilities of platforms to protect users from illegal content.
Signal, on the other hand, thanks to its architecture and data minimization policy, faces little to no such accusation. Since Signal is technically unable to access the content of messages, the platform is exempt from the need for moderation and cooperation with the authorities in matters of access to user data.
It is important to note that Telegram is facing increasing pressure from regulators, which may lead to changes in its policies in the future. Signal, on the other hand, continues to be a symbol of privacy, despite its limitations in functionality.
Ultimately, users need to weigh their privacy and functionality needs, as well as consider the potential risks associated with using each platform. It's a good idea to regularly monitor the security and privacy policies of both messengers to make informed decisions about which service best suits your requirements.
Source
Data privacy and user protection are among the most important issues in modern messengers. Signal and Telegram are two of the more popular apps that offer different approaches to this problem. Despite the fact that both messengers claim to protect the privacy of their users, their methods differ significantly, which affects the perception of these platforms by users and regulators.
Signal: Complete privacy as the basis of philosophy
Developed by the nonprofit Signal Foundation, Signal was originally conceived as an app that would provide the greatest possible privacy. Signal is based on the use of end-to-end encryption (E2EE) by default for all messages and calls. This means that only the sender and receiver can read or listen to the transmitted data. Signal does not store any data on its servers, other than the minimum information necessary for the service to work, such as the date the account was created and the date of the last login.This excerpt from Signal's policy emphasizes their commitment to data minimization, which means that they can only provide authorities with minimal information without revealing any of the content of the messages.
Signal not only guarantees privacy, but also has a clear no-moderation policy. Since all data is encrypted on users' devices, the company does not have access to their content, which excludes the possibility of any moderation. This makes Signal safe in terms of privacy, but at the same time limits the ability to combat illegal content.
Telegram: Balancing Privacy and Functionality
Telegram, in turn, offers a different approach to privacy. Unlike Signal, Telegram uses a cloud-based infrastructure that allows users to sync chats between different devices. This feature requires storing data on servers, which theoretically gives Telegram the ability to access the content of messages. However, the app says it only provides data in exceptional cases and when there are court decisions from multiple jurisdictions.This snippet explains how Telegram uses a distributed infrastructure to store data, allowing it to avoid sole control by any one jurisdiction. However, this also means that data may be available in certain circumstances.
Telegram emphasizes that, despite its architecture, they have not yet shared any user data with third parties. However, it is important to note that the platform can technically do this if it is forced to.
This excerpt indicates that Telegram does not consider requests to disclose data on private chats and groups, potentially allowing members of these groups to share illegal content without the risk of detection.
Moderation rules and related issues
One of the most discussed aspects of Telegram is its moderation policy. Telegram says it does not moderate the content of private chats and groups, which makes the platform attractive to those who value freedom of speech. However, this policy has led to numerous criticisms and accusations that the platform is being used to distribute illegal content, including child sexual abuse (CSAM) material, drug trafficking, and extremist propaganda.This excerpt shows that Telegram only moderates public channels, leaving private chats and groups out of control. This has led to increased criticism of the platform, especially from human rights organizations and regulators.
In the case of Signal, this problem does not arise because the platform does not have access to the content of users messages at all. However, this also means that Signal cannot help in the fight against illegal content, which is sometimes a concern for law enforcement.
Legal problems and the arrest of Pavel Durov
Telegram has repeatedly been at the center of scandals related to insufficient moderation and refusal to cooperate with the authorities. In August 2024, Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov was detained in France on charges related to using the platform for illegal activities, including the distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), drug trafficking, and money laundering. Telegram has been accused of failing to live up to its obligations to combat illegal content, which could threaten the safety of users.Telegram came under scrutiny from French authorities after it refused to provide information about a user accused of creating and distributing CSAM. This case raises important questions about the boundaries of privacy and the responsibilities of platforms to protect users from illegal content.
Signal, on the other hand, thanks to its architecture and data minimization policy, faces little to no such accusation. Since Signal is technically unable to access the content of messages, the platform is exempt from the need for moderation and cooperation with the authorities in matters of access to user data.
Conclusion
The choice between Signal and Telegram primarily depends on the user's priorities. If complete privacy and data protection are what matters most to you, Signal is the preferred choice due to its approach to encryption and data minimization. However, if you're looking for a platform with more functionality, such as large groups and channels, Telegram may seem more appealing, despite the risks associated with it.It is important to note that Telegram is facing increasing pressure from regulators, which may lead to changes in its policies in the future. Signal, on the other hand, continues to be a symbol of privacy, despite its limitations in functionality.
Ultimately, users need to weigh their privacy and functionality needs, as well as consider the potential risks associated with using each platform. It's a good idea to regularly monitor the security and privacy policies of both messengers to make informed decisions about which service best suits your requirements.
Source
