19
14th February 2023
concrete-online.co.uk/category/science/ | @ConcreteUEA
Tel -a - lie -a - gram Zak Steventon-Barnes Science Writer
Telegram is perhaps the most surprising success story in online messaging. It has successfully pitched itself as a privacy-centric messenger, even though it lacks E2EE (end-to-end encryption) by default, one of the most important technologies of recent years which is rapidly becoming standard. E2EE by default is already found on WhatsApp, Snapchat, iMessage, and Android Messenger (as well as security-focused options like Signal, Wire, Session, and Matrix) with Facebook planning to roll it out for Facebook Messenger and Instagram DMs by the end of this year. Even when Telegram does use E2EE (for example for secret chats), the system it uses is regarded by most cryptographic experts as abnormal and potentially unreliable. Messages without the protection of E2EE can be viewed by Telegram and by anyone it shares this data with, such as governments. Telegram has long sought to reassure users by stating in its FAQ and Privacy Policy that it has high standards for handing over data to governments, and both state clearly that Telegram had never done this. But in separate cases in Germany and India, Telegram has reportedly been handing over user data to police and courts. Despite this, Telegram’s privacy policy and FAQ remain
unchanged, raising the question And that Telegram channel still As a result, the court directed Telegram point when handing over data ‘can we really trust Telegram?’ appears to be empty, in the words to hand over the “phone numbers, either to the Indian court or to the The German government has had a of one privacy commentator, “that’s IP addresses, email addresses” of German police that they would long-running struggle to remove what what makes it a transparency report: the creators and operators of the need to update either their FAQ or it views as extremism on Telegram. it is transparent, there is nothing channels Manish Singh said were Privacy Policy. That would seem to However, according to information there.” Indeed, it is usual to publish distributing his study materials. me to be dishonesty by inaction. seen by Der Spiegel, a German a transparency report even when Next is the question of why did weekly magazine described by the nothing has been disclosed, just to Telegram appears to have complied Telegram first disclose user data New York Times as “the standard- show that you’re keeping up with where possible with a court order in Germany and India, which are bearer for investigative reporting in letting users know what’s going on. (published by Live Law India) stating not exactly at the top of the list Germany”, Telegram has been doing “the data as was available with Telegram of nations that privacy advocates more than just removing channels. Furthermore, I do think Telegram has been handed over in a sealed cover”. are concerned about, and in the should comply in cases of child Indian case over something as Der Spiegel wrote “Contrary to what abuse, Telegram’s privacy policy only Some of the data appears to not minor as a copyright violation, has been publicly stated so far, the says they would hand over data of have been available as Telegram hardly the terrorism that Telegram operators of the messenger app terror suspects and then only with limited the time for which it kept had said it would share data over. Telegram have released user data a court order, which Der Spiegel the data. However, the data handed to the Federal Criminal Police Office does not mention being required. over contains, according to the order, This is especially notable when (BKA) in several cases. According to “the names of the admins, the phone Telegram was based for several years SPIEGEL information, this was data When asked for comment numbers, and IP addresses of some in the UK, listed by Reporters Sans from suspects in the areas of child by Der Spiegel and Android of the channels [listed by Singh].” Frontières as an ‘enemy of the internet’ abuse and terrorism. In the case of Central, Telegram did not reply. While there was a court order in this for its surveillance capabilities. violations of other criminal offences, it case, the targets weren’t accused An optimist might suggest that it was is still difficult for German investigators In India, the case revolves around the of terrorism but rather copyright because Telegram was more confident to obtain information from Telegram, piracy of study materials created by infringement, a far less serious offence. the requests were legitimate. A according to security circles.” Neetu Singh, who is suing the people When asked for comment by pessimist might suggest that it was distributing them as well as Telegram. TechCrunch, Telegram replied that because requests from the UK and I’m not saying that this is the wrong Telegram attempted to argue that they “can’t confirm that any private USA are generally made in secret. decision, I myself would rather Telegram it was unable to provide the court data has been shared in this instance.” Another question is whether message complied with lawful police orders. My with IP addresses as it would violate contents are safe. The report by Der problem is that Telegram continues its privacy policy and the laws of An obvious question is whether this Spiegel did not state what data was to say that this has never happened. Singapore, where the data was located. is deliberate dishonesty, or simple shared, and the case in India listed As of time of writing, the FAQ still This lines up with Telegram’s claims failure to update its FAQ and privacy only phone numbers and IP addresses. states “to this day, we have disclosed in its FAQ that it protected user data policy. At the minimum, it would seem 0 bytes of user data to third parties, by splitting it between jurisdictions. that they are not doing what they said If they are handing over data in a case including governments.” While the they would, by handing out user data they said they wouldn’t and, to an privacy policy still says “If Telegram It appears, however, not to have been in a copyright case and by failing to organisation they said they wouldn’t, receives a court order that confirms very protected. The court decided that disclose this in a transparency report. what’s to stop them from handing you’re a terror suspect, we may “merely because Telegram chooses to Giving assurances that you over data they said they wouldn’t? And disclose your IP address and phone locate its server in Singapore, the same do not keep, despite being given that we have only heard cases number to the relevant authorities. cannot result in the Plaintiffs’ – who are clearly able to in the case of the that have come out in spite of Telegram, So far, this has never happened. copyright owners of course materials transparency report, is dishonesty. not because of it, how do we know When it does, we will include it in a – being left completely remediless that they haven’t already done so? semi-annual transparency report.” against the actual infringers.” Furthermore, I struggle to think that it has not occurred to them at some
Climate Change Corner: UEA praised for action on climate Becca Patchett
Science Writer
In January, Sir James Bevan, the Chief Executive of the Environment Agency, delivered a lecture at UEA called ‘Facing the fear of fear itself – the case for climate optimism.’ I was fortunate enough to be at this event and found it incredibly interesting. It was so nice to see a leading member of the environmental science community giving a talk at the UEA.
insufficient for our existing targets and that these are only possible with clear, stable, and well-designed policies. He said that the delivery of these policies, to meet targets such as net zero by 2050, is of far greater urgency than previously thought.
He discussed the need for clear leadership within the current government and that the issues surrounding the climate emergency cannot only be left to energy and The main message from Sir James’ environmental departments but to lecture was that we can be optimistic the government as a whole. Sir James about the current situation as we considered four main areas that the can achieve our targets with known government needs to confront which technology and through improvements are not being looked at currently. The in people’s lives and economic costs. first of these was that industry as a He went on to say that the costs, whole needs to be decarbonised. He although huge, are manageable then went on to discuss how heavy but need to be fairly distributed. goods vehicles need low-carbon He stated that the current policy is fuel sources. His third point was that
stakeholders such as the government cannot just ignore aviation and shipping emissions which are currently being less heavily focused on. His final point was the need for afforestation, biomass production, and peatland restoration. Sir James Bevan’s takeaway message was that we are currently in a better position to deal with climate change now – which he wouldn’t have said five years ago. He said this is thanks to organisations and research such as UEA and the Tyndall centre which he praised for their role as a producer of world-class analysis and as one of the early pioneers of climate research. Sir James also praised everyone at the talk by saying we were all leading to a better future to fight the climate crisis by just being there and being interested in the lecture.
Source :Unsplash h
