Elon Musk weighs in on encryption wars between Telegram and Signal

Given his influence in the tech sphere, Musk’s remarkable turnaround on Signal has become central to the current encryption debate — and, according to one crypto expert, is pushing users toward less secure alternatives.

A controversy over encryption

In recent weeks, Signal has come under fire from Pavel Durov, CEO of rival app Telegram, who blasted Signal’s encryption capabilities in a public post on his own platform, saying “the US government spent $3 million to develop Signal encryption. accusing Signal of being an insecure choice for private messaging.

“An alarming number of prominent people I spoke with noted that their “private” Signal messages had been exploited against them in courts or U.S. media,” Durov wrote.

Although Durov did not detail the allegations, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson previously claimed in an episode of the “Full Send Podcast” without evidence that the NSA broke into his Signal account before his trip in Moscow to interview Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“But whenever someone questions their encryption, Signal’s typical response is ‘we’re open source so everyone can check that everything is fine,'” Durov’s post continues. “However, this is a trap.”

Notably, messaging on Telegram is not end-to-end encrypted by default, as is the case on Signal.

Signal has also made its cryptography open source. It is widely considered a remarkably secure means of communication, trusted by Jeff Bezos and Amazon executives to conduct business privately.

In his article, Durov cited an article written by conservative activist Christopher Rufo – known in part for his crusade against DEI initiatives – that took aim at current Signal Foundation board chair Katherine Maher.

In his article, Rufo describes Maher as “a US-backed regime change agent” and alleged that she worked with the government to censor conservative views during her tenure at Wikipedia. Maher’s ideology, Rufo argued, means that Signal users should be cautious about its reliability, although he provided no evidence that Maher modified Signal’s encryption technology or changed the mission of the signal. organization since his arrival on the board of directors.

As Business Insider reported, the US government used encrypted devices to spy on its customers. However, there is no evidence that Signal, a non-profit company operating with open source code, has any ties to the US government.

How Musk fits in

Musk defended Signal in 2021 for protecting its users’ privacy, causing app downloads to skyrocket after urging people to “use Signal” in a Twitter post. At the time, he was joined by other prominent privacy advocates, like Edward Snowden, in his support of the app.

But following Rufo’s article, Musk’s public comments about the app changed dramatically.

In response to Rufo’s post, Musk wrote cryptically, “There are known vulnerabilities with Signal that are not patched. This seems strange…”

Musk did not elaborate on the so-called vulnerabilities, but his post prompted a response from Meredith Whittaker, president of Signal, which developed the app’s open source code and the company’s commitment to user privacy, saying the app’s developers “put a lot of effort.” thinking to ensure that our structure and development practices allow people to validate our claims, instead of just taking our word for it.

“We use cryptography to keep data out of the hands of everyone except those for whom it is intended (this includes protecting it from us)” Whittaker wrote. “The Signal protocol is the industry standard for a reason: it’s been hammered and attacked for over a decade, and it continues to stand the test of time.”

She added in another article, the goal of how Signal is built and how the nonprofit company is structured is such that no one can disrupt its privacy-focused mission, saying, “That’s it our agreement.”

Musk did not respond to Whittaker, but when Jack Dorsey reposted the same Rufo article, he wrote in a separate post that the allegations made in Rufo’s story were “concerning“.

A “campaign to slander Signal”

“Telegram has launched a pretty intense campaign to smear Signal as insecure, with help from Elon Musk,” said Matthew Green, a cryptography professor at Johns Hopkins. wrote in response to comments on the apps: “The goal appears to be to get activists to abandon encrypted Signal and move to the largely unencrypted Telegram. »

He added that promoting Telegram as safer than Signal, as Durov did, “is like promoting ketchup as being better for your car than synthetic motor oil. Telegram is not a secure messenger, period final.”

Green added that he doesn’t care which messenger people use, but wants people to “understand the issues.”

“If you use Telegram, we experts can’t even guarantee that your communications are confidential. In fact, at this point I assume they aren’t, even in Secret Chats mode,” Green wrote. “You should do what you want with this information. Think about privacy issues. Think about where Telegram operates its servers and what government jurisdictions they work in. Decide if you’re interested in this. Don’t bother because you You are misinformed.”

Green, as well as representatives for Musk, Signal and Telegram, did not immediately respond to Business Insider’s requests for comment.