Telegram is not safe

[spluder101]

https://www.asiaone.com/digital/leas...ns-take-action

Heard from my grab customer that SPF can catch ppl on telegram. Bros, be careful if u are in those grps.

[Qwerty_Again]

You would be surprised at how much surveillance is gathered about yourself without your knowledge, both by locally and overseas agencies.

[nuclearkid]

Some dudes on the Telegram channel Nasi Lemak were charged

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...ce-more-charge

The police are watching. Makes me wonder if those selling their Telegram channels for subscription actually know that they are flouting the law by distributing pornographic material. The news mentions that these guys were charged for merely distributing. To produce and distribute are separate and additional charges to the same action.

[fillerup]

If you are there to TALK then it's ok.

[35cents]

agree.... dun anyhow talk, anywhere...

[enguaima]

Originally Posted by 35cents

agree.... dun anyhow talk, anywhere...

Agree, only the sia suay idiotic Trade and Industry Minister can anyhow talk

[sammy124]

line has less security feature compared to telegram tho.

[sammyboyfor]

The problem is not Telegram. The problem is the connection to Telegram though local ISPs. They probably cannot see the encrypted messages but they can see all the metadata which is enough to know which chat group you are in.

It is more secure if you use a VPN plus DNS over HTTPs which is what https://1.1.1.1 provides.

However with the proliferation of surveillance techniques developed by NSA etc I honestly think that nothing is 100% secure. All you can do is make it as hard as possible to the point that they do not bother unless they consider you to be a national security threat.

When it comes to prosecuting chat group participants what the authorities do is go after the low hanging fruit ie those that have not bothered to hide their identities and once they have succeeded in penetrating the weakest link they can then use this breach to round up a few other participants.

They then prosecute a few to make an example of them in order to scare the rest into submission.

[cashon9]

I didn't know that sharing non-nude photos which are publicly available on these girls' Instagram accounts aren't allowed.

[donut88]

Nothing is safe.

Your phone is listening to your conversation via Google.

Any one realised that whatever keywords you speak, Google picks them up and run some adverts later in your FB or other apps?

Google is listening to your conversations all the time.

[sammyboyfor]

Originally Posted by cashon9

I didn't know that sharing non-nude photos which are publicly available on these girls' Instagram accounts aren't allowed.

The only offense I can think of is copyright violation.

[intelcore3]

Originally Posted by sammyboyfor

The only offense I can think of is copyright violation.

if so, then it is a rights holder to assert

[sammyboyfor]

Originally Posted by intelcore3

if so, then it is a rights holder to assert

That's what I would have thought but in Singapore the laws are interpreted to suit the moment.

[TheIdesOfMarch]

Originally Posted by sammyboyfor

That's what I would have thought but in Singapore the laws are interpreted to suit the moment.

But also subject to effective defence dismantling them in court.

AGC doesn't push cases if it can't be a clear open and shut cast iron win for them.

Also, food for thought. The arrest and charging of the Nasi Lemak group individuals was widely publicised. But there's been utter radio silence about their case developments and sentencing (assuming they've even been sentenced). Food for thought to ask why this is the case.

[cashon9]

Originally Posted by sammyboyfor

The only offense I can think of is copyright violation.

Does that actually make sense when there's literally a "share" function? I can understand if the profiles or photos are private or friends-only or nudes/ leaks.