Some interesting subtleties about Telegram’s encryption implementation. Firstly the UX is a bit weird: although they advertise as being a fully encrypted product, they only offer end-2-end encryption on 2 person chats, not group chats, and it’s not the default, and to enable it you have to hunt through deeply burried settings, and even then it only works if the other person in the chat is online when you setup the chat.
Also their encryption implementation is a little bit "non standard". The author of the article linked above suggests that combining all these subtleties, it would be understandable if some people formed the view that their implementation was in some way malicious, i.e. user hostile. IMO there are a huge amount of right up to the line and no further situations in this story.
Like a weird honey pot inside a honey pot inside a honey pot. A honey pot fractal? Is that even a thing? Why did Pavel get fired for trying to unresign? There’s definitely something uncanny about this whole thing.
Has this entire story been written by an AI? #