Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

What? Literally all Telegram clients are open source.



What about the server? Telegram is not strictly e2e.


Huh, I was going to point out that the Signal server isn't Free Software either, since for a while it wasn't being published, but it seems they have gotten back into publishing it.

https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server


while it's amazing for them to keep maintaining it, as the person mentioned down the thread, it's hard to know what they are actually running, right? and it's not a lot of work to patch this or clone/branch as necessary before deploying. Oh well, i already resigned that a part of my life will be run by someone else by now.


Publishing server code provides no assurance of anything (although it is still nice, for other reasons) since nobody can know if what they (for any "they") run in production is the same as the public source.

Open client code and documented protoccols are much more important. If you can compile your own client from open source code and it works fine, then you can know for sure what you're sending to the server.


An "open source server"... are you trolling?


> Show me an example of an "open source server".

XMPP and Matrix services run open source software such as ejabberd


Running open source software != "Open source server"


If you bothered to look, you would find that both of the examples given are open-source servers. You might then deduce that you misunderstood the comment to which you replied.


You cannot audit the system/service logs for those servers, neither can you audit the hardware running those servers, nor the internet providers who can snoop on the traffic et al... That's the argument behind "Open source server" in case it wasn't clear.


This might be where the misunderstanding is. This software is indeed server software that anyone can run, and the global network consists of servers run by many independent entities, in many cases with full control of the hardware. One of these entities can be you, and it is completely possible to run from home.

The integrity of your conversation with someone would then depend on both your endpoints, clients, and the respective server.

Just like email, but for chat. There is no single gatekeeper who is allowed to use the network.


No misunderstanding at all. The argument is very clear.

> global network consists of servers run by many independent entities

This is not the case for all the popular chat apps including Signal which uses centralized servers which they run themselves. They clearly see little benefit from this distributed independent server model.

And even that doesn't mean the server is open source.

As I explained earlier if you cannot audit the physical server you are connected to, claiming it's open source is useless. FYI that's literally how the term open source was used in this context!

> The integrity of your conversation with someone would then depend on both your endpoints, clients, and the respective server.

Client to client verification simply works and eliminates the need to also "verify" the server which if compromised introduces an even higher risk of contamination in the trust model (too many co-dependent functions are delegated to the server), not to mention collusion in establishing integrity of yet another device that we need to trust.


Not sure what part of my comment amused you so much.

An IM platform server can be open sourced. Just like any kind of software.

It's just a matter of publishing your code and, preferably making it possible to verify that the service your users are connecting to is build using the same published code.


How could you possibly verify what code they are running server-side?

Typically, the way it goes is that you implement e2ee such that even a fully compromised server cannot read the clients messages, publish the client's source code, and build it yourself or use reproducible builds. That ladt part is where you can criticize Signal. Whether they publish the server code is mostly irrelevant unless you want to run a separate messenger infrastructure.


> unless you want to run a separate messenger infrastructure.

Or if you S2S federate with the upstream server. Which is a core differentiator of XMPP and Matrix. Signal server(s) notably supported proper federation during their initial growth-phase but famously closed it off ("The ecosystem is moving").

Similar story as Google [Chat/Talk/Hangouts], which did federate over XMPP before they closed that down years ago.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: