Germany to ban Telegram?

[kedaha]

Saw it in The Independent. As the article so succinctly puts it:

The messaging app has grown partly because it is one of the easiest ways to use an encrypted chat service, with messages protected from snooping as they are sent between users. It also offers a system of groups that allows for messages to be broadcast quickly.

So Germany is considering banning or clamping down on telegram, and by the look of it, not only Germany but other European countries. The claim is that it can be used by extremists (dissidents?) but they'll certainly be rubbing their hands with glee over at whatsapp should it come to the app's being banned as it already is in Iran, Pakistan & China.

If some kind of binary blob backdoor were to be inserted in the software to control its use, then the Debian telegram-desktop package would have to be moved from the official main repository to non-free or snap, but it seems unlikely Telegram would meekly agree to change its privacy policies.

[Fossy]

Reminds me of a quote from political scientist Bart Maddens
sorry in Dutch ... https://businessam.be/belgische-academi ... miebeleid/
I quote him :
Maddens says he sometimes looks wide-eyed at the way politicians treat some fundamental rights: "A number of basic constitutional rights are now regarded as favors that can be granted by the government on condition that those people behave properly ... Then we are on the way to the Chinese points system."

somewhat related : The moral bankruptcy of the Flemish socialists
sorry in Dutch too : https://businessam.be/het-morele-failli ... cialisten/

I just mean , it goes way beyond that , and unfortunately not just in Germany .

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

[reinob]

It's not really about encryption, but just due to the fact that large groups of people use that tool to "organize" themselves, including threatening/targetting politicians and other people.

Whatsapp, Signal, and other encrypted messaging systems cannot (and/or are not) used for such purposes, as they lack the large public groups that apparently Telegram provides (which AFAIK are not even encrypted end-to-end, and many of the people posting illegal threats there even use their real name).

The reason for banning would be simply that Telegram does not (seem to) cooperate with the authorities.

[canci]

It's not really about encryption, but just due to the fact that large groups of people use that tool to "organize" themselves, including threatening/targetting politicians and other people.

Whatsapp, Signal, and other encrypted messaging systems cannot (and/or are not) used for such purposes, as they lack the large public groups that apparently Telegram provides (which AFAIK are not even encrypted end-to-end, and many of the people posting illegal threats there even use their real name).

The reason for banning would be simply that Telegram does not (seem to) cooperate with the authorities.

I think the reason isn't that you can't use other messengers for that purpose, but the 2nd reason you gave is the actual one: Telegram is partially based in I think Qatar or the Arab Emirates, partially in the Russian Federation. Both countries that make it hard for EU authorities to follow up on crimes.

It's quite the predicament, since on the one hand very militant and dangerous far right groups gather on Telegram and, as you rightly said, plan illegal threats or even violence against opposing political subjects. However, there's also a growing number of people who don't care about free software or encryption and have high stakes for computing/phones/chat to remain a commercial endeavour, so now I regularly see people whose life depends on Google ad revenue, promoting Apple or Android, living off social media like Facebook, Twitter, etc., who promote non-free networks and try to cast shade on independent encrypted messengers due to allegedly being a hotbed for illegal activity. I have a feeling that their ultimate goal though is to prevent people from leaving commercial platforms and organising freely on the Fediverse or on alternative, non-commercial messengers, as their revenues would go away.

[reinob]

On the large scheme of things, I guess you are right, @canci.. but I guess this would drift slightly into conspiracy territory ("their ultimate goal", but who are they? :).

At least the issue with Telegram is more or less well known and understood (even though many people automatically associate it with the also-hot topic of banning end-to-end encryption, because "they" also want it..)

[canci]

On the large scheme of things, I guess you are right, @canci.. but I guess this would drift slightly into conspiracy territory ("their ultimate goal", but who are they? .

At least the issue with Telegram is more or less well known and understood (even though many people automatically associate it with the also-hot topic of banning end-to-end encryption, because "they" also want it..)

I mentioned who they are. Content creators or journalists who are forced to make a living on social media. I also didn't claim it's a definite thing, just that there is an increased negative backlash against cryptography and free software messengers, and I'm afraid it might be because journalists are afraid that social media/messengers without ads or tracking might lose them money. I understand their fears, as most of them aren't compensated well for their work, since everyone expects news to be free. So, I don't think it's a conspiracy theory, just a natural reaction to people seeing their income in danger.

OTOH, there is hardly anything positive about cryptography or free software if it's a larger news outlet, except portals like Telepolis that are tied to a tech publisher like Heise anyway.

So yeah, I'm voicing a fear, not really alleging any conspiracies.

[mm3100]

Saw it in The Independent. As the article so succinctly puts it:

The messaging app has grown partly because it is one of the easiest ways to use an encrypted chat service, with messages protected from snooping as they are sent between users. It also offers a system of groups that allows for messages to be broadcast quickly.

I have been using protonmail for some time, and following their blog you can see how much trouble they tend to have with such claims. Even though they try to prevent unsolicited use it keeps happening from time to time. Which gets them in bad rep with other providers. So far I didn't had issue with it, but I have heard of others not being able to get their mail through or it going automatically to spam.

It is kind of tragedy of such privacy focused goals, that they tend to be used at least once for illegal gains, and then they end up having to prove their worth above illegal activities. For that I am somewhat glad Signal isn't that much popular yet, as it by default uses end to end encryption and makes them unable to read through messages even if they wanted.

[canci]

Signal doesn't have this problem because you have to identify with a phone number and a lot of western countries have outlawed the sale of anonymous numbers. Also, Signal doesn't care for removing its dependence on Google services: Play Store rather than F-Droid, Electron-based desktop app that sends red flags if you have decent Selinux/Apparmor settings, weird public denouncements and mocking of self hosting and federation by its creator Moxie. All in all it's equally as subpar as using Telegram, just differently. It's a shame that XMPP had so many problems with onboarding.

[clementishutin]

This is not the first time that Germany has tried to curb hate speech.

[canci]

I don't think it's specifically just about hate speech, but moreso about the very accute anti-state right-wing (Reichsbürger) and medical terrorism (disinformation on vaccines, vaccination passport/QR code falsification).

[kedaha]

This is not the first time that Germany has tried to curb hate speech.

Or Iran, Pakistan or China for that matter; for example back in 2019 Iran banned Telegram, claiming it encourages "armed uprisings" according to this report.
Might it not be the case that the present attempt is conflated with the claim that this app is used by—the pejoratively-dubbed—"anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists", opposed to Government policies? I use the adverb "pejoratively" because, logically, one can be opposed to such policies democratically, without being tarred with the same brush.
Finally, I doubt very much that the community of Debian users who use Telegram would be overjoyed if it were banned from Debian.

[canci]

Just to clarify: I find banning Telegram or any chat messengers solely because German government officials can't access encrypted chats wrong.

But the situation in Germany is not due to people voicing opinions and conspiracies about vaccines. It's about right-wing terrorists organising disruption in vaccination and public health efforts.

[argentwolf]

Seriously? There is no such thing as "hate speech", there is only speech!
Start by stating the issue correctly (i.e., it's about government NOT allowing its citizens liberty), it's NOT and NEVER has been about an app [PERIOD].
This thread speaking of such 'speech' delusion only furthers an attempted retardation of sovereign free thinking individuals. STOP IT!

[cynwulf]

From the Independent article:

But those same features have proven controversial, as they have allowed criminals and other groups to organise away from law enforcement.

In Germany the platform is seen a source for conspiracy theories and hate speech, especially as the country has grappled with the Covid pandemic. It seen as a major platform for anti-lockdown activists.

There has been strong resistance to vaccination among a minority of Germans. The latest figures show 72 per cent are “fully vaccinated”. Chancellor Olaf Scholz has backed calls for a vaccine mandate and MPs are expected to begin debating a bill later this month.

Germany is not alone in potentially seeking controls on Telegram. Bans and regulations exist in a variety of countries, from China to India and Russia. Those governments often point to criminal and problem content being spread on the platform to justify the blocks.

The slippery slope to totalitarianism. It stuns me that those sentences and statements are seemingly perfectly acceptable to most. "other groups", not criminals, but vaguely, this catch all of "other groups"... should be unable to "organise away from law enforcement"?

Shut down, censor and ban an entire platform because it hosts groups with views you may disagree with? You have to tolerate the views you despise, to ensure that the views which you believe in and foster can still be spoken - you can't have it both ways. Freedom of speech is just that. This is nothing more than a cynical move to drive users onto platforms owned and controlled by "Big Tech", and thus under constant surveillance by government agencies.

No matter what: people will always disagree and "conspiracy theories" will never be extinguished. There are only three types of conspiracy theory - virally spread nonsense - which is mostly facilitated by the Big Tech based platforms, state sponsored misinformation dissipated via the same platforms - and those that turn out to be true (not many). Many commonly accepted truths were once conspiracy theories. We are also fed state sponsored "conspiracy theories" and propaganda constantly, via the media about foreign states such as North Korea, China, Venezuela and Russia - these are happily and readily, absorbed by the willing sponges.

If someone is opposed to vaccinations or a lockdown, that should be their democratic right as part of a free society. It's incredible how such people ("groups", as they call them) are now apparently under the same umbrella as provisional terrorist groups.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

[canci]

Again, it's not about conspiracy theories. It's about right wing extremists organising the disruption of public health. And again: No, that doesn't give German authorities carte blanche for outlawing cryptography and alternative messengers.

[reinob]

And maybe once more for completeness: the issue seems to be that if the authorities need data concerning a certain message (e.g. a death threat or such that needs to be investigated by the police) Telegram apparently does not respond/cooperate, which is however a requirement for any such company to operate in Germany (and likely in any other civilized country, at least in the EU).

It just happens that Telegram is used for criminal and not criminal content, regardless of how despicable it may be. The issue is a rather formal/technical one.

But I've heard that apparently and finally there seems to be some contact (read optimistically: "cooperation") going on between the German authorities and Telegram, so the whole issue of banning Telegram may be moot after all.

[kedaha]

According to an article dated 31 January 2022 at reclaimthenet.org, citing an article in Der Spiegel, it looks like Germany has backed down, since, "it would have been impossible anyway." But who knows? It evidently wasn't impossible in Iran, Pakistan & China.

[Hallvor]

I don't think it's specifically just about hate speech, but moreso about the very accute anti-state right-wing (Reichsbürger) and medical terrorism (disinformation on vaccines, vaccination passport/QR code falsification).

It seems hard is this case to separate between the government persecuting the opposition and promoting public health. We have an opposition that is outspoken and protesting the government's handling of the pandemic. This is not only important in a democracy; it should be actively encouraged. And you call this terrorism?

My take on this is that people have the right to be wrong, and they have the right to be stupid: People have the right to be wrong about vaccines, vaccination passports, 5G, and whatnot. If their own stupidity kills them, I have no problem with that.

Threatening to shut down an entire application because some people are wrong and happen to communicate there, is like shutting down roads because of a few @sshole drivers.

Coincidentally, it would make surveillance easier: I am sure that wasn't their intention at all... Iran, Pakistan and China. What great company that would be.

[Fossy]

Covid-19 vaccines: ethical, legal and practical considerations … sofar the European Parliamentary Assembly
Report | Doc. 15212 | 11 January 2021 :
https://pace.coe.int/en/files/28925/html#_TOC_d19e670

Resolution 2361 (2021) Text adopted by the Assembly on 27 January 2021 (5th Sitting) :
https://pace.coe.int/en/files/29004/html

Edit :
Big Brother's " Kampf " to lean towards a democratic dictatorship on Chinese model ?
Dangerous precedent if you ask me.

By the way , I have never ( 70 years old ) been vaccinated against any flu strain to date but this does not mean I am an anti-vaxer , with thanks not to stick this label on me .
At most a marginal with a well-functioning immune system .

[pcalvert]

And maybe once more for completeness: the issue seems to be that if the authorities need data concerning a certain message (e.g. a death threat or such that needs to be investigated by the police) Telegram apparently does not respond/cooperate, which is however a requirement for any such company to operate in Germany (and likely in any other civilized country, at least in the EU).

From Telegram's 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.”

Source:
https://telegram.org/privacy#8-3-law-en ... uthorities