5 ms·

One of the Telegram apps for Android did use Google Maps in http-mode. The issue was fixed within an hour, and the update is on its way to Play Market, containi

One of the Telegram apps for Android did use Google Maps in http-mode. The issue was fixed within an hour, and the update is on its way to Play Market, containing several other security-related improvements. At this moment we are working together with security experts on code review for our client applications. We awarded the person who discovered the bug and are designing a bug bounty program, which will be rolled out soon.

enraged_camel 13y ago
>>We awarded the person who discovered the bug How much did you award them?
louwrentius 13y ago
How the F* is it possible that your app's reason of existence depends on proper security and you miss usage of HTTP where only HTTPS should be used? A vulnerability like that could be found with a proper grep on the source code. But even that seems to be too much effort.
jere 13y ago
It may be worth pointing that the Telegram FAQ claims there are two Android apps and they were both developed through a contest (I assume by third party developers). I'm curious if it was the N or S edition? http://telegram.org/faq#q-why-do-you-have-two-android-apps http://telegram.org/faq#q-why-do-you-have-two-android-apps
- litemn 13y ago
  Leak was in the N edition.
nationcrafting 13y ago
Good on you for being so quick to implement these bug fixes. Others on HN have commented that the iteration process is probably not the best way to approach crypto, due to the high risk for the end user. It seems obvious to me that nothing in this world is ever bug-free, and there is no such thing as foolproof where time is involved. You might as well accept this, and actually embrace it. It seems to me Telegram are embracing it very well. Telegram is not robust at any point in time, but it is antifragile, since it benefits from shocks to become stronger over time. Like Hydra's heads, you can cut them off, but they will grow back twice as numerous. This is actually much better than robustness, it just doesn't look like it, because heads being cut off is more memorable and mediatic than heads growing back. Of course, there is the argument that such high claims should not have been made on buggy software. But it is because such high claims were made, and because crypto people got annoyed about them, that everyone has been trying to break it, thus rendering it more foolproof. It's annoying, but it's clearly working: at this rate of improvement, I'd be surprised if the product weren't pretty damn good in just a few months' time. If anyone has doubts over the current version, well, just don't use it in life-threatening situations until you're reasonably confident about it being fit for your purposes, which is an assessment that will also depend on the person or institution you're trying to avoid, and the quality of resources they have at their disposal.
- DanBC 13y ago
  Would you be happy with bridges, or elevators, using an iterative process for safety design? How about training doctors? Don't build up through school (frogs and a sheep's lung) through universities (pigs, human corpses) and medical school (more corpses, watching surgery, assisting surgery) - just let them learn with open heart surgery? > If anyone has doubts over the current version, well, just don't use it in life-threatening situations That's good advice. How is Telegram advertising itself? On the homepage: > Telegram messages are heavily encrypted and can self-destruct. > Telegram keeps your messages safe from hacker attacks. In their FAQ: > Telegram is the fastest and most secure messaging system in the world. > Secret chats are meant for people who really want secure messaging. etc. This is nice wording, and I appreciate them saying this: > Telegram is more secure than mass market messengers like WhatsApp and Line. We are based on the MTProto protocol (see description and advanced FAQ), built by our specialists, employing time-tested algorithms, to make security compatible with high speed delivery and reliability. We are continuously working with the community to improve the security of our protocol and clients. It contains worrying bits ("built by our specialists"), but is mostly okay.
  - nationcrafting 13y ago
    Your point about bridges and elevators actually illustrates my own point very well. Bridges and elevators may be quite safe today, but they weren't when people first started making them. Some bridges collapsed under various forms of pressure, and better bridges were designed as a result. They all necessarily made the claim to be safe until they were shown not to be. So, yes, even bridges were built using the iterative process. It's just that the iterative process started long before you were born, and you found the world as it is without seeing the iterations that occurred before. The same is true for doctors. There used to be all kinds of theories about how to cure the plague, or tuberculosis, or diseases we now know how to cure with a pill. Some of them worked, others didn't. Iteration at work, just over a longer timeline than your own lifetime.
    - hazz 13y ago
      This would make sense if cryptography was a young field, but this iteration and improvement has been going on for thousands of years (and modern digital cryptography has been developing for the better half of a century). It is known how to implement cryptography securely. Just as you would expect bridges built today to stay up, and doctors working today to be properly trained, you should expect cryptography implementations to be sensible and secure, or at least not try to carve a new, experimental path when people's lives are potentially at stake.
aioprisan 13y ago
You allow HTTP outgoing in your "secure" app? Of location information, that can lead to someone's safety or life to be put in danger if they really buy all your marketing? Why allow outside requests at all in the first place from your app? What if DNS is compromised and someone is tapping into google.com from a local tower/wifi DNS override and sending all Google Maps traffic to their server instead? Shouldn't you be using a proxied call to these outside services through your internal domain as API calls, with a way to verify that someone didn't hijack that connection and imitating it as well? This is all very much security 101 stuff and would have expected much better from an app labeling it as a simple, secure crypto solution.

enraged_camel 13y ago

>>We awarded the person who discovered the bug How much did you award them?

louwrentius 13y ago

How the F* is it possible that your app's reason of existence depends on proper security and you miss usage of HTTP where only HTTPS should be used? A vulnerability like that could be found with a proper grep on the source code. But even that seems to be too much effort.

jere 13y ago

It may be worth pointing that the Telegram FAQ claims there are two Android apps and they were both developed through a contest (I assume by third party developers). I'm curious if it was the N or S edition? http://telegram.org/faq#q-why-do-you-have-two-android-apps http://telegram.org/faq#q-why-do-you-have-two-android-apps

litemn 13y ago
Leak was in the N edition.

nationcrafting 13y ago

Good on you for being so quick to implement these bug fixes. Others on HN have commented that the iteration process is probably not the best way to approach crypto, due to the high risk for the end user. It seems obvious to me that nothing in this world is ever bug-free, and there is no such thing as foolproof where time is involved. You might as well accept this, and actually embrace it. It seems to me Telegram are embracing it very well. Telegram is not robust at any point in time, but it is antifragile, since it benefits from shocks to become stronger over time. Like Hydra's heads, you can cut them off, but they will grow back twice as numerous. This is actually much better than robustness, it just doesn't look like it, because heads being cut off is more memorable and mediatic than heads growing back. Of course, there is the argument that such high claims should not have been made on buggy software. But it is because such high claims were made, and because crypto people got annoyed about them, that everyone has been trying to break it, thus rendering it more foolproof. It's annoying, but it's clearly working: at this rate of improvement, I'd be surprised if the product weren't pretty damn good in just a few months' time. If anyone has doubts over the current version, well, just don't use it in life-threatening situations until you're reasonably confident about it being fit for your purposes, which is an assessment that will also depend on the person or institution you're trying to avoid, and the quality of resources they have at their disposal.

DanBC 13y ago
Would you be happy with bridges, or elevators, using an iterative process for safety design? How about training doctors? Don't build up through school (frogs and a sheep's lung) through universities (pigs, human corpses) and medical school (more corpses, watching surgery, assisting surgery) - just let them learn with open heart surgery? > If anyone has doubts over the current version, well, just don't use it in life-threatening situations That's good advice. How is Telegram advertising itself? On the homepage: > Telegram messages are heavily encrypted and can self-destruct. > Telegram keeps your messages safe from hacker attacks. In their FAQ: > Telegram is the fastest and most secure messaging system in the world. > Secret chats are meant for people who really want secure messaging. etc. This is nice wording, and I appreciate them saying this: > Telegram is more secure than mass market messengers like WhatsApp and Line. We are based on the MTProto protocol (see description and advanced FAQ), built by our specialists, employing time-tested algorithms, to make security compatible with high speed delivery and reliability. We are continuously working with the community to improve the security of our protocol and clients. It contains worrying bits ("built by our specialists"), but is mostly okay.
- nationcrafting 13y ago
  Your point about bridges and elevators actually illustrates my own point very well. Bridges and elevators may be quite safe today, but they weren't when people first started making them. Some bridges collapsed under various forms of pressure, and better bridges were designed as a result. They all necessarily made the claim to be safe until they were shown not to be. So, yes, even bridges were built using the iterative process. It's just that the iterative process started long before you were born, and you found the world as it is without seeing the iterations that occurred before. The same is true for doctors. There used to be all kinds of theories about how to cure the plague, or tuberculosis, or diseases we now know how to cure with a pill. Some of them worked, others didn't. Iteration at work, just over a longer timeline than your own lifetime.
  - hazz 13y ago
    This would make sense if cryptography was a young field, but this iteration and improvement has been going on for thousands of years (and modern digital cryptography has been developing for the better half of a century). It is known how to implement cryptography securely. Just as you would expect bridges built today to stay up, and doctors working today to be properly trained, you should expect cryptography implementations to be sensible and secure, or at least not try to carve a new, experimental path when people's lives are potentially at stake.

aioprisan 13y ago

You allow HTTP outgoing in your "secure" app? Of location information, that can lead to someone's safety or life to be put in danger if they really buy all your marketing? Why allow outside requests at all in the first place from your app? What if DNS is compromised and someone is tapping into google.com from a local tower/wifi DNS override and sending all Google Maps traffic to their server instead? Shouldn't you be using a proxied call to these outside services through your internal domain as API calls, with a way to verify that someone didn't hijack that connection and imitating it as well? This is all very much security 101 stuff and would have expected much better from an app labeling it as a simple, secure crypto solution.