Thoughts on the Durov Arrest

https://prestonbyrne.com/2024/08/24/thoughts-on-the-durov-arrest/

by nailer • 2 years ago

139 205 2 years ago

cheptsov• 2 years ago

“Summing up: for the time being, if you run a social media company, or if you provide encrypted messaging services, which are accessible in France, and you’re based in the United States, get out of Europe.”

hcfman• 2 years ago

Yeah, Europe is becoming more and more authoritarian and less and less demoractic.

The Netherlands, the host country of the ICC, in 2021 made a law that anyone that works in a job with an obligation to secrecy cannot be prosecuted for lying under oath in a court. They cited an example of a lawyer client confidenially. They did not however, talk about the fact that now everyone in government can lie under oath in court. This undermines the very functional principle of a court of law. Lovely for the ICC.

In addition, they created an organisation called the RIEC, with does not have a natural person as it's presentative, which under Dutch law means that it cannot be taken to court by anyone. The gave this organisation control over not just criminal investigations but "interventions", which have no definition and can be anything. They can do anything against anyone and not be held accountabile. And typically they do this through weak civilian proxies for further deniability.

There's a 6x part Dutch documentary where it shows that 9 innocent people were sent to jail on fabricated evidence. One committed suicide. The Dutch will not re-open this case and the responsible person (The former head of the organised crime unit in Arnhein) is not the president of the court of Maastricht. Not fired, promoted.

https://npo.nl/start/serie/de-villamoord/seizoen-2/de-leeuw-...

So the Netherlands has clearly loss a functional democracy.

It's the way all of Europe is going.

tptacek12• 2 years ago

This analysis leaves out the fact that Pavel Durov is, with Telegram, in approximately the same position Ladar Levison was with Lavabit. Unlike Meredith Whitaker, Durov actually is in a position to furnish documents to the French government, where he has citizenship. He's in that position because he has repeatedly made deliberate product decisions, to the bafflement of cryptographers around the world, to keep himself in that position.

If you literally have plaintext documents responsive to criminal inquiries in a jurisdiction you are subject to, we don't reach the "internet censorship wars". You're in a place not dissimilar to a 1970s telephone company; the "random people can't simply declare themselves above the law wars". Don't be in that place. Encrypt end-to-end.

cperciva6• 2 years ago

Indeed. Two of the more common questions I get with Tarsnap are

    Q. How do I know that Tarsnap is secure?
    A. Read the source code.
    Q. Ok, but you're really smart, what's stopping you from putting in a backdoor and hiding it really well? 
    A. I don't want to get tortured, and ensuring that I can't decrypt your data protects *me*.

daliusd• 2 years ago

IMHO second answer does not hold water. If you will end up in situation where you are tortured they will torture you until you will you say how to add the backdoor.

sandworm101• 2 years ago

> A. I don't want to get tortured, and ensuring that I can't decrypt your data protects me.

There is a line in RickAndMorty about this, which I won't repeat here. To paraphrase: the one thing worse than bring tortured for information you have is being tortured for information you don't have.

adolph2• 2 years ago

  Q. How do I know that Tarsnap is secure?
  A. Read the source code.

This is a "good enough" but less than reassuring answer in the post-Solar Winds world. (It wasn't before, but less so since the advent of "package managers" and the like.) How would someone evaluate the quality and security of the build process and minimal dependencies (which might have their own problems [0])?

As a non-security person thinking of how might one could evaluate this: Could adversarial builds (say performed in and using tools commonly available in several locations with different types of government spying) generate the same binary? Could that act as a sort of proof of an untainted toolchain? Or a canary for where a build process is tainted?

0. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39890817

roenxi• 2 years ago

While I agree that in many (all?) ways it is that simple, this is an area where there is a lot of scope for there to be unseen pressure from intelligence agencies. The French literally invented espionage (I choose my words carefully here) let alone whatever pressure comes at Telegram from elsewhere. It is hard to be confident in the whys of decision making around large communications tools and security.

Although, ironically, if the French are arresting him now that says good things about Telegram and their willingness to dob customers in.

intunderflow• 2 years ago

As another HN user pointed out Telegram does not store messages in plaintext: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41348228

tptacek12• 2 years ago

That user seems to be misinformed, and appears to be discussing client-server encryption, not end-to-end encryption. That's unsurprising, because, among the many decisions Durov has made that have baffled cryptographers, attempting to confuse users about the implications of E2E vs. client-server encryption is one of the most notorious.

boudin2• 2 years ago

In a way ot reminds me of the Phantom Secure story. If you are suspected to purpusefully facilitate crime, you can be held responsible. This seems to be true as well in the US.

In the phantom secure story the intent was crystal clear. In the Telegram case it seems that the refusal to cooperate with investigations cast enough doubts to arrest the CEO and put him in similar shoes.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/phantom-secure-takedown-031...

tptacek12• 2 years ago

It's so much worse than that (at least under US law, but I assume French law, which has fewer speech and evidentiary protections, is worse still). By putting himself in the position where he was clearly and straightforwardly able to furnish assistance to criminal investigations, he likely acquired some form of accomplice liability (or whatever equivalent they have in France) as soon as he refused to comply with a lawful order: the refusal itself is a purposeful facilitation.

That's a distinction between end-to-end encrypted applications and cosmetically "secure" apps like Telegram.

Timber-6539• 2 years ago

If the data that the French government wanted was in plaintext they wouldn't need to use the $5 wrench. Also not sure why E2EE is the answer here, governments can pass laws as we have seen with the UK to water the encryption down.

fvdessen4• 2 years ago

It’s worse than that, the ‘find people nearby’ feature is a public drug and prostitution advertising billboard with zero moderation and has been for years. They’re in a closer position to silkroad than lavabit

SSLy3• 2 years ago

I wish it was actual dealers and hookers, it's just spam bots.

nom• 2 years ago

Wow I didn't know that feature even existed. Looks like it's full of bots though. I can imagine that makes it completely unusable for actual dealers.

codedokode7• 2 years ago

While I heard about this feature I thought it was made to find friends or dates. What shows that the intended use is to faciliate drug trade?

Also, in my country they usually just write the ordinary website name on the wall and add "VPN Tor" whatever that could mean. Maybe they try to hint that Tor and VPN are apps for drug trade? Do Tor and VPN have moderation and do they cooperate with law enforcement?

uxhacker• 2 years ago

Is this an unintentional war by Europe on facebook, signal, etc? What will the outcome be? Will these services leave Europe? Will Europe change the rules ?

riffraff• 2 years ago

It seems not yet. Signal is e2e encrypted data which telegram is not, Facebook has regularly collaborated with authorities, which apparently telegram did not. Every case is different.

I think TFA is ignoring the usual practice of prosecutors everywhere to stack accusations with a bunch of things which won't stick.

Nonetheless, France has been flirting with extended internet censorship for a while.

guappa7• 2 years ago

No it's a NATO war against unaligned companies that don't only cooperate with NATO.

herbst3• 2 years ago

Facebook is in the headlines because it shits on people's privacy. Telegram is assumed to do the exact opposite.

truman01• 2 years ago

Telegram’s End to End Encryption by default is disabled, only available for one-to-one conversation. My ‘guess’ is that most of group conversions are pretty accessible on telegram servers, which might be the case here.

ks20482• 2 years ago

This article repeatedly referred to Telegraph as "encrypted" ("have full encryption on their services", "when you’re running a globally accessible encrypted platform"), which seems misleading, if by default, it is not end-to-end encrypted.

NdMAND2• 2 years ago

I think the idea is that Telegram servers are encrypted with keys that Telegram itself has access to (just distributed to different countries) - as opposed to e2e encryption.

cedws2• 2 years ago

The speculation on this situation is crazy. People are losing their minds over the idea of Durov being arrested over crimes committed on his platform, but we don’t even know the details. For all we know he could have been completely complicit. Hold your horses people.

weinzierl• 2 years ago

This and in addition, I have not seen proof that he knew about a pending arrest when he went to France. Many commenters and media paint him somewhere on the spectrum between arrogant and stupid, when it is not clear at all that he had a chance to avoid the situation.

willsoon4• 2 years ago

The article specifically argues about the ex-hypothesis of Durov's involvement in these crimes.

And maybe I misread it, but this thread also argues about that possibility.

akira25012• 2 years ago

the idea of Durov being arrested

I don't know him but the idea that an individual CEO would be handled in this way seems extreme and calls into question the actual motives of the French government.

For all we know he could have been completely complicit.

I guess he could be an international terrorist drug dealing pimp.

Hold your horses people.

The French governments actions and communication on the subject has created this environment. They can easily alter it if they choose.

mytailorisrich3• 2 years ago

It's not for the government to communicate, and criminal investigations are secret in France. So prosecutors don't have to make any public statements or release any documents (and in fact they shouldn't) but in such high profile cases they are likely to make a general statement to placate the media.

lispm2• 2 years ago

that an individual CEO would be handled in this way seems extreme

I would hope that it is pretty normal, that a CEO can be treated exactly that way.

pelorat4• 2 years ago

He wasn't arrested by the French government. He was arrested by the law because he's a French citizen who provides a service used by criminals, and he has refused to act on lawful requests.

hackcasual• 2 years ago

Trying to understand his legal situation by analogizing with US law understanding strikes me as some real Dunning-Kruegering. Surely someone like Preston Byrne has someone he can reach out to to get a better understanding of the actual French legal situation Durov is in.

sofixa5• 2 years ago

Yeah, a lot of people, commentators, HNers, Redditors invoke US laws and procedures as reasoning and for comparison. Which is bordering on the useless - okay, you think he wouldn't have been arrested in the US, cool, what does that actually tell us about him being arrested in France? Nothing? You didn't even bother to look up how warrants and arrests and criminal proceedings work in France? Thank you for wasting my time with your commentary.

pjbyrne2• 2 years ago

The article was written for the benefit of Americans with business operations in France, so understanding why America is way better than France to run a social media company is relevant information.

That the article wound up being circulated to a bunch of Europeans who thought it was an article about French law after someone posted it on HN is something of an accident; the article isn't for them (unless of course they're planning on starting a social media company, in which case leaving Europe and setting up shop in America on a permanent basis would be recommended). The very fact of his arrest is enough for Americans to know to steer clear of the EU going forward.

repelsteeltje• 2 years ago

+1.

Reading the article I was baffled to see all this talk about section 230 of communication and decency act. Telegram moved from Russia to Dubai and Durov was arrested in France.

Using the US hammer on a foreign nail gives vibes of Team America - World Police parody.

ks20482• 2 years ago

He starts by saying that in the US, social media owners are not responsible for crimes committed by their users. How does that relate to the Kim DotCom case? Is piracy treated differently?

pjerem2• 2 years ago

What it means is that European states are going to try to extraterritorially dictate to foreign companies what content those companies can and cannot host on foreign-based webservers

It looks like the author failed to grab that Durov asked for the French nationality and therefore is a French citizen who must comply to French law.

Telegram is not the only company in the world which has a social media platform used for unlawful purposes

Except Telegram is the only one of those companies which intentionally doesn’t answers to legal requests. All other social networks are cooperating with law enforcers in the countries they operate.

Even Signal is cooperating when asked too. The difference is that unlike Signal, Telegram owns its users data in plaintext.

Also the author fails to understand that the complicity here doesn’t mean that companies in Europe are responsible for their users content. Like in the US, they are responsible if they fail to comply to laws in a reasonable time. Telegram doesn’t comply in a reasonable time since they voluntarily don’t comply at all. That’s a huge difference.

willsoon4• 2 years ago

Legal request

A legal request comes from a legal authority: a judge.

Cooperating with law enforcement

Law Enforcement (that's the police, right?) are not judges and are not authorised to rule on legal matters.

Hate has not logic.

So you are trying to cover the whole spectrum of things to ensure your belief that Durov is being legally detained.

Sorry for editing instead of answering. Reddit says I "post too fast".

pjerem2• 2 years ago

What logic ? Where is the hate ?

agubelu• 2 years ago

A legal authority (judge) issues a legal request, which must be complied with to the best of your ability. If you don't comply, you're acting unlawfully and thus you're detained by law enforcement (police).

It's a pretty straightforward logic.

gostsamo• 2 years ago

The author wants to cry against the EU lows because EU bad period. "Don't travel to Europe, don't hire in Europe" and so on. The rest is looking for arguments to support his "hunches".

ashellunts• 2 years ago

From telegram privacy policy:

If Telegram receives a court order that confirms you're a terror suspect, we may disclose your IP address and phone number to the relevant authorities. So far, this has never happened. When it does, we will include it in a semiannual transparency report published at: https://t.me/transparency.

pelorat4• 2 years ago

What about "child trafficking suspect", "arms dealer suspect" or "drug dealer suspect" ?

surfingdino3• 2 years ago

Telegram in the primary communication platform for the Russian forces in Ukraine. That may or may not be of interest to the French authorities, but the fact that it is also used by the Russian mercenaries taking control over former French colonies definitely is. A French citizen aiding Russian military and mercenaries in the French sphere of interest is asking for trouble.

This is pure conjecture, btw.

SSLy3• 2 years ago

FWIW I've been told it's sometimes also used by the Ukrainian diaspora to communicate with their families back in the war zone. Tough whatsapp appears to be more popular for that.

StrLght• 2 years ago

Indeed, Russia's ridiculous OPSEC has nothing to do with France enforcing its' laws. Even if this was the case, they're a few years late.

pelorat4• 2 years ago

Also the author fails to understand that the complicity here doesn’t mean that companies in Europe are responsible for their users content

In the EU, every company is responsible for what their users post on their service. There's a reason you won't find any (or very few) comment sections on the website of EU media and news companies. No one wanted to pay for the moderators needed, so when the law came around most comment sections were shuttered.

LtWorf3• 2 years ago

Do you have a source for this very outlandish claim? Since most newspapers do have comment sections.

JumpCrisscross2• 2 years ago

The author is “an adjunct professor of law at Fordham Law School in New York City, where [he] teach[es] cryptocurrency law and practice” [1].

The law professor bit is shocking, given the article basically revolves around it making “zero sense for Durov to do any of these things,” as if criminality is always rational. But crypto has broadly come out in support of Durov [2].

[1] https://prestonbyrne.com/

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/27/technology/telegram-crypt...

BlueTemplar5• 2 years ago

That article mostly talks about cryptocurrencies.

In this case "crypto" in the title is confusing, since it could be also/instead about the cryptography industry...

aredox• 2 years ago

And it all makes sense if Durov is in fact working for the French secret services and his "arrestation" is just a way to protect him from novichok or a balcony fall, and a cover story for how France got hold of the keys to Telegram.

I mean, he got French citizenship despite not fitting any legal requirements, and nobody in the French government has given any explanation on why he got it.

beefnugs• 2 years ago

What a brutal slope here. What is the EU's endgame? That they can tell any tech company to implement specific features and backdoors to any product? How much do they pay for those man hours? Is there any examples of companies giving over gigabytes of encrypted garbage, then being told "hey you need to come up with a way for us to decrypt this"

What if it wasn't even encrypted, and was just so many gigabytes of data that the government doesn't have the skill or manhours themselves to wade through it? Can they demand big data tools tailor made per company?

Why can't companies submit software and data to these requests so covered in "cookie consent style popups" that nobody could ever get through it in multiple lifetimes?

biztos• 2 years ago

This is a take I keep seeing, more or less, and yet Telegram is not an encrypted messaging service for the most part, and so Durov could have moderated but actively promoted his not doing so; and the crimes this article leads with, as examples of things that’d get you in trouble in the US too, are said to have been prevalent on Telegram.

(Also, maybe it’s nitpicking, but there are very obvious reasons why it’s better to have the Taliban using WhatsApp and the US getting all that metadata and maybe more, rather than the Taliban finding some other channel. If Washington wanted WhatsApp banned in Afghanistan it would’ve happened long ago.)

What I can’t figure out is, are these commentators naïve or just piling on for attention or what?

guappa7• 2 years ago

Read the actual charges. Providing an encrypted means of communication is one of the charges.

bigiain2• 2 years ago

there are very obvious reasons why it’s better to have the Taliban using WhatsApp and the US getting all that metadata and maybe more, rather than the Taliban finding some other channel

There are some very obvious opportunities when the Taliban (or enemy de jour, like drug cartels) feel the need to be "finding another channel".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Trojan_Shield

"Hardened encrypted devices provide an "impenetrable shield against law enforcement surveillance” and are in high demand by TCOs (transnational criminal organizations), thus the shutdown of Phantom Secure in March 2018 left a vacuum for TCOs in need of an alternative system for secure communication.

Around the same time, the San Diego FBI branch had been working with a person who had been developing a "next-generation" encrypted device for use by criminal networks. The person was facing charges and cooperated with the FBI in exchange for a reduced sentence. The person offered to develop ANOM and then use his contacts to distribute it to TCOs through existing networks. Before the devices were put to use, however, the FBI, and the AFP had a backdoor built into the communication platform which allowed law enforcement agencies to decrypt and store the messages as the messages were transmitted."

I'm still seeing drug busts here in Australia that're attributed to An0m (or which look extremely likely to have used An0m as part of the investigation).

newaccount74• 2 years ago

This is quite a one-sided take.

What makes Telegram unique is:

1) They have access to almost all the content

2) They try to use arguments about jurisdiction to avoid helping law enforcement with lawful requests

All the other messaging platforms (WhatsApp, Signal, iMessage) have started to use end-to-end encryption to avoid being in this position in the first place. But they also comply with law enforcement and share the data they do have, and don't hinder lawful investigations.

The biggest issue with Telegram is that due to the lack of end-to-end encryption it is a huge security risk; how do you know the operators aren't selling access to your chats to some criminal actor or a repressive government agency? You don't.

danpalmer• 2 years ago

I found it interesting to read that their approach is supposedly to split encryption keys across jurisdictions. It sounds like they believe that they should therefore not be able to be compelled to reveal any plaintext because the keys are not in the jurisdiction asking for data, but as far as I can tell this is obviously rubbish, because a computer is not subject to the law, an individual is, and in this case an individual with the power to comply who is seemingly deciding not to.

What's weird is that there aren't really technical blockers to E2E encryption anymore (maybe different 10+ years ago), and with such a weak alternative, you'd expect Telegram to want to switch. The fact they haven't for so long, and have essentially doubled down on their flawed approach suggests that there's a reason we're not privy to as to why they don't want to move to E2E encryption. I'd hope not, and I don't want to throw around conspiracy theories, but when a decision doesn't make sense that's usually due to missing information, and I do wonder what we're missing.

NayamAmarshe5• 2 years ago

that there aren't really technical blockers to E2E encryption anymore

There are several disadvantages, and Telegram would lose its key features:

1. Cloud Sync

2. Instant Multi-device login

3. The ability to create large group chats, like thousands or hundreds of thousands of people in a single place.

4. Sending files up to 4GB.

mjevans• 2 years ago

Usually it's a power or money profit motive. Just think what tasty things some large corporation or government could do with that data. They could sell ads! Or hold dissidents hostage. All sorts of things.

codedokode7• 2 years ago

Several of the charges were about using unlicensed cryptographic tools; I am sure full E2E encryption would make those charges heavier.

jcranmer• 2 years ago

The fundamental problem we have right know is that we know the charges, but not the factual allegations that underlie those charges.

Put differently, if you wanted to put together a charge list for the head of a large social media company you didn't like, this is what it would look like. If you wanted to put together a charge list for someone actively running the group chat of a terrorist group... this is what it would look like. And same for pretty much every level in between.

Deciding which of these scenarios is more likely is more indicative of your priors of the scenarios than it is of the evidence. Is this the French government going after a fairly innocuous service because they don't like what they provide? Or is it the government going after a service saying "neener neener your laws can't touch us"? Or is it the government going after an individual with tenuous connections to criminal organizations? Or one with solid connections to criminal organizations? Truthfully, we don't have the evidence to distinguish between these scenarios yet, and we should reserve judgement until such evidence comes to light.

mytailorisrich3• 2 years ago

The thing is that French law for criminal procedure says that it is secret. So in principle judges and prosecutors don't have to publicly say anything and in fact should not say anything apart from discussing with Durov and his lawyers.

That said, for high profile cases they tend to give some information to control rumors and the media.

fvdessen4• 2 years ago

I just opened telegram, went to ‘find people nearby’ and was immediately presented with a long list of drug dealers and prostitutes advertising their services. I’m pretty sure that’s not legal

guappa7• 2 years ago

Now try to buy from them. They are just scammers who are nowhere near you. They will ask you to send codes from gift cards.

Yeul• 2 years ago

Every once in a while I find a slip of paper in my postbox with the contact info of a local drug dealer. The police can't be bothered arresting them and even if they do such a dealer gets replaced in hours anyway. They use WhatsApp.

I think it's CP that gets Telegram in hot water. Prostitution or drugs bothers noone but pedophiles trading stuff wakes everyone up.

codedokode7• 2 years ago

In my country, they just write a website domain on the wall and add "VPN Tor". I wonder, why police doesn't do anything with Tor and VPN.

maeil• 2 years ago

If, however, the French are simply saying that Durov’s failure to police his users or respond promptly to French document requests is the crime (which I suspect is the case), then this represents a dramatic escalation in the online censorship wars. What it means is that European states are going to try to extraterritorially dictate to foreign companies what content those companies can and cannot host on foreign-based webservers.

This completely ignores that the amount of criminal activity on Telegram in Europe as well as parts of Asia in itself has been escalating. The author is coming at this from a US-based point of view, which is fine, but unless you're particularly interested in the topic it's difficult for Americans to be aware of the scale of Telegram's role in criminality elsewhere, as this does not seem to be the case in the US. Maybe someone here knows why Telegram is not as core to organized crime in the US, and what communication methods are used there. But it's clear that in Europe and parts of Asia, its role is massive, and has been growing and growing without a limit in sight. This is easy to underestimate.

In these parts of the world, the scale of it is of a completely different magnitude than criminal activity on e.g. Facebook, which the author brings up but is a misguided comparison. And that's ignoring the relative percentages of legit vs criminal activity, which are inverted (if not worse) between the two platforms, because that's not as important.

Scale and absolute numbers, the absolute detrimental effect on society, matter.

I don't see this as an escalation because there was always going to be a line somewhere. A line where the amount of criminal activity on a platform, which when crossed , was going to cause arrests. Telegram's continuous growth in this aspect means that the line has now been crossed.

And in reality, this line exists anywhere even in the US. It might be higher, but it's still there. The idea of not having such a line is clearly insane - that would mean no matter if something completely destroys society, we're going to let it pass. Such lines are almost never enshrined in law, for obvious reasons. They only become visible to everyone as they are crossed.

guappa7• 2 years ago

There have been several arrests of drug dealers using whatsapp over the years.

Do you have any official source that criminals on telegram are more? Or is it just a feeling you have?

fvdessen4• 2 years ago

If I open telegram and go to ‘find people nearby’ I am presented with a long list of drug dealers and prostitutes advertising their services. So they not only help with communication, they help with advertising, and since this is all public, they can’t really say they’re not aware

pjietr• 2 years ago

Anecdotal Instagram evidence on the situation in Berlin: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CxJGJs7s-lE/

In Finland, stuff seems to be more on Telegram than on dark web as well

coffeebeqn• 2 years ago

In the last few years most of the drug supply has moved from tor to telegram in large parts of Europe for example

mediumsmart• 2 years ago

Thinking is not shitting

Is there a difference between telegram and other social media messenger hybrids?

Do they allow anti Russian content the same way they allow pro Russian content?

Is that a problem?

necovek• 2 years ago

Telegram is widely used in Ukraine too, and that includes a lot of anti-Russia material.

sofixa5• 2 years ago

Telegram allows everything and anything, including unsavoury/illegal content (supposedly you can report it and it gets taken down, but potentially the whole crux of the issue Durov was arrested over was that it's not enough/fast enough/law enforcement can't report). There are channels from Russian and Ukrainian officials making official announcements (today our city of X got hit by missiles, please go to ABC if you need help), there are Russian officials using it for official communications (including military and intelligence). There are paramilitaries and other such groups using it for internal and external communications too.

herbst3• 2 years ago

Telegram allows everything and anything, including unsavoury/illegal content

Which is simply wrong. Telegram is heavily banning users, channels and groups (if reported I assume) the difference is that they don't apply American morals but something a bit more open than that.

To give you a concrete example, it strictly follows basically the same morality terms for porn as onlyfans or pornhub (except the copy right that is)

cja5• 2 years ago

Why are so many people taking this at face value? There's a war going on and the man in charge of the communications system for one side flew to try to meet his leader and then flew to an enemy country where there was a warrant for his arrest.

I'm not saying the French aren't serious about the charges they've published but they're hardly the main point.

There's plenty in the media about the use of Telegram by the the Russian military and intelligence services, as well as politicians. For example: https://www.politico.eu/article/telegram-ceo-arrest-pavel-du...

sofixa5• 2 years ago

I see this argument a lot, but it falls apart when you realise Ukraine also extensively uses Telegram. Maybe not for official state business (Zelenskyy chatting with his intelligence chief), but many times officials communicate with civilians via Telegram channels.

akira25012• 2 years ago

He could be selling one side out against the other.

cja5• 2 years ago

Your second sentence contradicts your first

willsoon4• 2 years ago

1. Is encryption itself a crime?

2. Presumably Durov was in a meeting with Putin.

2. 1. But there is no war, the war against Ukraine is not a war in legal terms.

2. 2. And there is no charge of meeting with the enemy or anything like that.

2.3. So you are saying that we are talking about the charges in vain, because the political underground is obvious.

2.4. Yes, you are right, that is why we are talking about the charges.

cja5• 2 years ago

Imagine that Ukraine used a US messaging system for military comms. The head of that company visits Serbia (a country friendly to Russia) and is arrested on some charges that you don't agree with. Will you debate the charges or the consequences for Ukraine?

Maybe it's because I live very close to Russia and most of the people here probably don't think about the war every day, but the strategic reality of this situation makes all these privacy arguments so trivial.

I need to see this happen to someone other than Durov to consider that it's not about the war. While it's only Durov then I really don't think he's discussing privacy issues with the French - they are discussing his access to Telegram's systems and his ability and willingness to give that to the allies of Ukraine. Likewise in Russia they are not discussing the privacy issues, they are trying to lock Durov out Telegram's systems and the military and intelligence services are working on alternative ways to communicate, and meanwhile the effectiveness on the battlefield of the Russian army is compromised.

malinens• 2 years ago

That's just wrong. Telegram is trusted by both Ukraine and Russia. That tells a lot. Also I am living near Russian border and remember well how Durov left Russia and I am quite sure he is not puppet of Putin...

konart2• 2 years ago

in charge of the communications system for one side

Telegram us being used by both sides of the conflict. It is as populat in Ukraine as it in Russia. (or other ex-USSR states for that matter)

cja5• 2 years ago

It's not used by the Ukrainian military. It is used extensively by Russian military and intelligence

hakdht• 2 years ago

Yes, the situation is strange. According to many sources the following is true:

1) Russia uses Telegram for military communications.

2) Russian military bloggers use Telegram for detailed updates, including graphic pictures.

3) Ukrainian military bloggers do the same.

4) Russian mercenaries use Telegram in former French colonies in Africa.

France may want to shut down 4), but I would think that Western intelligence services would not want to shut down the uses in the Ukraine conflict because they can track everything. So maybe they just want a better tracking API.

They would want to shut it down in preparation for a large Middle East war though. In that case, they'd prefer hand picked CNN embedded journalists and not have graphic pictures appear freely.

Lavabit was mentioned here. Perhaps Durov should just announce to shut down Telegram and find out if certain forces beg him to continue the service.

NayamAmarshe5• 2 years ago

The fact that the French president invited Durov to dinner and then arrested him, is so strange. They want to control Telegram, the arrest is just an excuse.

uhryks• 2 years ago

Judiciary power is (somewhat) independent from executive power. Thank god people can still do things without needing Macron's approval.

NayamAmarshe5• 2 years ago

'somewhat' is the keyword.

paulcarroty• 2 years ago

https://istories.media/en/news/2024/08/27/pavel-durov-has-vi...

Telegram is FSB project, lost all my doubts about.

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK• 2 years ago

e2ee is not a panacea. Law enforcement is more interested in metadata than content: who messaged whom and when, which account corresponds to which phone number etc. This data is still sitting on whatsapp and signal servers, so not much safer than telegram. I'm looking at Element now: at least it doesn't ask for phone number and I can host my own server.

medo-bear3• 2 years ago

Another danger here is that other governments (eg Russia China) might respond assymetrically (or even exactly the same) against other CEOs of companies that give agency to narratives they are not happy with. For example by kidnapping them and constructing some bogus charges, using this instance as a precedent.

medo-bear3• 2 years ago

where he has citizenship

Durov is being persecuted for his role as a CEO of Telegram. Telegram is a legal entity that has nothing to do with France

lispm2• 2 years ago

Telegram is a legal entity that has nothing to do with France

That's obviously false. Telegram is providing services to French and EU citizens.

medo-bear3• 2 years ago

Or the EU and France allowed its citizens to gain services from a foreign company, Telegram, and did nothing to stop them? Russia at least tried to block them.

tetrisgm• 2 years ago

I read somewhere that his exile is vastly overstated. Apparently he has traveled to Russia 40x in the recent years. Take it with a grain of salt.

JoelJacobson• 2 years ago

Strange, I haven't found any articles that mention the "Find People Nearby" and "Make Myself Visible" features, which seems to be core features criminals use to sell drugs/sex, finding new random clients in the area.

The public non-encrypted aliases or bio of users often contain wordings that explicitly spell out they sell drugs or sex.

For instance, one alias is "WEED COKE MDMA SPE..."

I don't have a clear opinion on whether drugs or selling sex should be illegal or not, can see pros/cons, but my opinion is irrelevant, my point here is that Law Enforcement, might find this very problematic, that there is obviously no moderation here.

herbst3• 2 years ago

I always was under assumption that these are all fake. There are ~300 people living nearby me. 5 are dealers and 10 prostitutes according to telegram.

dewey2• 2 years ago

Coordinates can be spoofed.

LtWorf3• 2 years ago

You believe those are real people who are really near you?

They aren't more near you than the ladies in "meet single women in..." are.

https://xkcd.com/713/

gpayan• 2 years ago

I wonder why Durov traveled to France, knowing that he would be arrested there. Could there be more to the story?

g42gregory• 2 years ago

He did not know that he would be arrested there. The plane tried to leave Paris airspace at the last minute, but it was too late. Durov should have known that he could be arrested. Basically, arrogance and wishful thinking, complacency, believing in "democracy". Still, UAE will probably get him out.

dolmen3• 2 years ago

The plane tried to leave Paris airspace at the last minute, but it was too late.

Do you have sources?

surfingdino3• 2 years ago

Summing up: for the time being, if you run a social media company, or if you provide encrypted messaging services, which are accessible in France, and you’re based in the United States, get out of Europe.

If you make a mockery of the law enforcement's requests made within the scope of the local laws then yes, you should get out. Especially if you show your middle finger to the country you visit and hold citizenship of.

Durov has money to buy citizenships that allow him access to most of the world without needing to obtain a visa so I'm sure he has a well-paid legal team that proactively monitor the situation. He may have been informed of the legal noose tightening around his neck and chose to go to France for one reason--France does not extradite its citizens and he happens to hold French citizenship. This puts him out of the reach of other jurisdictions (e.g. the US) and he may be hoping for a deal and better food. We should wait for official information from the French authorities as well as for news of people connected to him and his businesses falling out of windows. The former will explain the latter.

SSLy3• 2 years ago

More importantly, this puts him (mostly) out of reach of moscow too.

pelorat4• 2 years ago

Another American who knows nothing about things outside of the USA.

sersi• 2 years ago

Reading the charges, one jump to my mind as being scary:

"Importation d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable."

- Import of a cryptographic mean that does not exclusively perform authentication or integrity control functions without prior declaration.

This to me is a deeply disturbing charge, would that mean that using full disk encryption I'd be liable to be charged with that? Did the maintainers of LUKS do a prior declaration? If not are they likely to be charged if they ever travel to France?

After all, I can fully imagine a server being seized in a data center being encrypted with LUKS. In that case, is it the fault of the maintainers?

BlueTemplar5• 2 years ago

This to me is a deeply disturbing charge, would that mean that using full disk encryption I'd be liable to be charged with that?

Interesting take, what counts as «importing» for software ? Is a copy (with source) of open-source software more in danger of being deemed so ?

Did the maintainers of LUKS do a prior declaration? If not are they likely to be charged if they ever travel to France?

I would assume yes, but the likelihood might depend on their specific circumstances ?

It wasn't that long ago that the USA considered cryptography to be on the same level of danger as weapons wrt export...

higgsbozo• 2 years ago

More and more proof is coming out that Pavel Durov has secretly traveled to Russia more than 60 times between 2014 to 2021. If so, it's close to impossible that he does not cooperate with RU security services. It's either co-operation or he'd be kaput.

Furthermore, after his failure with his crypto project in the United States, he returned to his homeland, and the Kremlin immediately "unblocked" Telegram. The next day, Durov promised investors to pay off the debts. Quite a coincidence.

Telegram also has taken down various channels from one side of the global conflict and not others. For example, he took down the channel of Iranians protesting against the dictatorship in 2017, but he refuses to take down the channels that sell child *pornography, drug$, human trafficking, or Ru$$ians posting videos of beheading Ukrainian POWs, etc.

This whole situation is really complicated, to say the least. Freedom of speech is paramount, but in times of global information warfare, it's not really possible to stay neutral as the owner of the top communication platform. Especially given the horrific stuff that’s being done on this platform.

He says he is neutral, but the facts indicate that it's not quite true. And it’s understandable from the aspect that his life is probably at risk if he doesn’t cooperate. So, it seems he's just trying to navigate a delicate balance, maneuvering between conflicting pressures. Prison is not great, even if it’s French, but Europe is less likely to give him novichok tea, so he apparently chose to work with the other side.

orwin• 2 years ago

I really wish people who don't know anything would shut up and wait for the GaV to end and the Ofmin judge statement before getting any conclusions.

Yes, France is more and more corrupt, the fact that they deny anticor the right to pursue lawsuit against companies and politicians since 2023 is proof, but this arrest in particular seems well within the legal system (if he is kept under surveillance for more than 96 hours however I will agree with the author, but frankly it's a 'broken clock right twice a day' kind of agreement)

BlueTemplar5• 2 years ago

if they just passively host the content

But specifically, the issue with the likes of today's Facebook and Twitter (no idea about Telegram) is that they do NOT «just passively host the content», in fact they started to actively engage into its editorializing as soon as they switched to using «algorithmic feeds» !

This has even been a pretty big legislative battle in EU a few years ago, when there were attempts to try to legislate «3rd way(s)» between the extremes of dumb hosting and online newspaper :

https://communia-association.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/...

(Anyone has an up to date chart with the current situation, ideally in English ?)

https://communia-association.org/2024/06/10/article-17-five-...

BlueTemplar5• 2 years ago

Huh, I really did not expect US courts to agree with me that soon :

https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/28/tiktok_blackout_chall...

adolph2• 2 years ago

Is HTTPS legal in France?

Here, the French government is accusing Durov of being complicit with – i.e. aiding and abetting – criminal activity and also unlicensed provision of “cryptological” software, with encryption products subject to prior government authorization before their use in France will be approved.

treebeard901• 2 years ago

Articles about Telegram and similar encryption problems always tend to hit the very manipulative topics. Terrorism and CSAM are always used. The four horsemen methodology for control.

The point is to emotionally manipulate the audience into complicity. To cause people not to question the underlying privacy and legal issues.

Instead they want the reader to have thoughts of large numbers of people, in organized networks presumably, that want to cause terror to them or harm to their children.

This causes a reaction in many people to forget about basic rights and focus on the fear they have been given instead.

I'm sure France and the U.S. have a million reasons to want this data from the Ukraine war, to probably some cases of the things they claim. However, it is definitely exaggerated and no one should be willing to trade the ability to communicate privately out of some fear that people who want to harm you are also able to communicate privately.

None of it really makes any logical sense because at the end of the day, to end all encryption means the Government would have to basically criminalize math.

So of course they rely on the reliable methods of emotional manipulation. I mean, they should have a blank check to go after this guy and anyone else, right? You don't support terrorism do you???

codedokode7• 2 years ago

I see contradictory statements: some media report that warrant for Durov brothers was issued in March 2024 [2], yet, france24 [1] claims that:

In a subsequent statement, Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau said Durov was arrested as part of a probe into an unnamed person launched by the office's cybercrime unit on July 8.

So the probe was launched in July, but the warrant was issued in March? I do not understand that. Was warrant issued on a different case? Is information about warrant incorrect?

[1] https://www.france24.com/en/france/20240826-telegram-ceo-pav...

[2] https://www.politico.eu/article/exclusive-telegram-ceo-broth...

codedokode7• 2 years ago

Actually I remember a couple of cases where Telegram cooperated with US regulators:

- at Apple's demand Telegram made adult-themed groups unaccessible by default

- at Apple's or Google's demand Telegram removed an animated emoji of an exploding eggplant

Though those requests resemble censorship rather than preventing crime.

Thoughts on the Durov Arrest

Related Stories