
Telegram App Says Apple Is Blocking Updates Over Dispute with Russia - Anon1096
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/31/technology/telegram-apple-russia.html
======
jenga22
Apple has now entered dangerous territory.

Over the last month they seem to have banned apps because some government out
there didn't like that app. To make matters worse, those very same governments
weren't happy with the app being removed from their regional app store but
they demanded it removed from all app stores.

The VPN issue was a wake up call for a lot of developers. These apps were on
the app store for years and because China didn't like these apps one morning,
they banned it and referred to some arbitrary clause in the app store TOS.

The thing is this script has played out before. Twitter also had a vibrant
ecosystem of third party developers. Those developers made Twitter into a
billion dollar company. Then one morning, they decided certain classes of apps
were not okay. This back and forth went on for months until there were barely
any apps left. Twitter eventua

The same thing is happening with Apple. Several founders I've spoken to, all
with big exits in the past, refuse to write apps first for Apple or Google
because of the threat of getting "banned one morning".

Worse, VCs are now getting nervous in investing in startups where the app is
the fundamental foundation of the business.

For any market to thrive, there needs to be transparency and stability. Just
like Twitter, once developers are gone....they're gone. They won't come back
and consumers will start wondering if the 1,000 dollar smartphone they
purchased, with subpar apps, is really worth it.

~~~
netheril96
There are now plenty of VPN apps on iOS App Store China, some of which have
literal "VPN" in their names. Many were removed, but then many new are added.
For example, I used an App called Wingy to connect to my shadowsocks server,
and that app was removed during the purge of VPN apps. But then other Wingy-
like apps appear, and I am now using one of them.

I don't know what exactly has happened though. Is Apple defying China's
government in secret now? Or are Chinese regulators only concerned with GFW
bypass on some special days that has passed?

~~~
jquast
had to ban all the good vpn apps to make sure users would download the latest
ones with all the latest backdoor tech!

------
veidr
This is a fundamental problem with the single DRM-enforced app store model
that Apple innovated, and which has been widely copied and lauded.

Once you implement that, you have to toady up to whatever governments exist,
including oppressive/murderous regimes, to be in their markets.

If your ecosystem is just console video games, say, it's not that big of a
deal; you have to either censor some games or don't enter certain countries at
all. Might be unfortunate, but its not a fundamental human rights issue.

But if your ecosystem is about general-purpose apps and communication tools,
you become complicit to some degree in all sorts of vile shit; oppression and
forced relocation of minorities (China), mass murder of gay people (Russia),
etc.

There's no way around this for Apple; they have to cave to government demands
or risk being forced out of the Russian market. That wasn't inevitable,
though; it's a side effect of the model they chose.

~~~
dane-pgp
> If your ecosystem is just console video games, say, it's not that big of a
> deal; you have to either censor some games or don't enter certain countries
> at all. Might be unfortunate, but its not a fundamental human rights issue.

Be careful of the ground you might concede to the censors. Freedom of
expression is most certainly a fundamental human right:

[https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/quotes/universal-
declar...](https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/quotes/universal-declaration-
of-human-rights-article-19)

It's easy to dismiss video games as "lesser" forms of art or expression, but
we shouldn't underestimate the potential for games to convey significant
social and political messages (both positive and negative).

In case a concrete example is needed of a thought-provoking video game with
artistic merit, let me suggest this to those who haven't seen or played it:

[http://www.papersplea.se/](http://www.papersplea.se/)

~~~
ggg9990
There isn’t a single source of truth on what is or isn’t a “fundamental human
right.” It’s a matter of opinion that differs across time and geography.

~~~
lillesvin
While it's not as universal as its name makes it seem, the UN uses The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights)
That would be a good starting point since it already backed by some pretty
powerful countries.

------
JumpCrisscross
This is presently an accusation by Telegram, nothing more. Sample of reasons
why Apple may be doing whatever they are doing:

1) Telegram is prevalently used by Syrian fighters [1]. (Why they chose
Telegram over Signal beats me.) As the Syrian conflict winds down, these
fighters are returning home. That creates a security imperative for many
governments, including in the EU.

2) Telegram recently ran an ICO that, at the very least, probably runs afoul
of American securities law.

3) All of the reasons any app gets held up in review that are not "the Russian
government pressured Apple."

TL; DR We have no evidence this is because of Russian meddling.

[1] [https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/isis-telegram-
app_us_59...](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/isis-telegram-
app_us_59259254e4b0ec129d3136d5)

~~~
anderber
All this points to me is the risks of owning a phone whose only way to add
apps is to go through one company's own discretion. Unlike in Android where
you can easily install apps from other app stores or just download the file.

~~~
jonknee
Installing apps outside an app store also introduces other risks, it's not
exactly one better than the other. Personally I'd love to sideload apps, but
seeing how big of a mess that was on desktops leads me to believe most users
are better served by a gatekeeper.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
While that's probably true, Apple could bring to iOS what macOS has been doing
for years: code-signed apps that aren't distributed through the App Store and
aren't subject to any of the App Store's restrictions (and can't guarantee the
ostensible security benefits), but can still be "disabled" by Apple if they
prove to be bad actors. On macOS, there are actually three states for this:
signed App Store apps, signed regular apps, and entirely unsigned apps. Users
get to tell the system what to allow and disallow. There's no really good
_technical_ reason for Apple not to allow at least the first two categories on
iOS by now.

(That system on macOS is, for those who don't remember, called Gatekeeper!)

~~~
saagarjha
> There's no really good technical reason for Apple not to allow at least the
> first two categories on iOS by now.

But then I can sign a jailbreak with my developer certificate and pass it
around. Now, you're going to say that such a thing has never happened on
macOS, but the fact that it _could_ happen because you've opened the door to
it is something that should be considered.

~~~
y_molodtsov
As soon as it get wide enough they’d just block you.

------
eganist
I'd given this challenge some thought in the recent past, specifically the
challenge that the big app store owners are each generally susceptible to
coercion by large nation-state actors in spite of being multinationally
distributed.

There was a project I was involved in rather heavily (cyph // resulted in a
pair of neat conference talks) where we'd accounted for the risks of apps
being banned by making the entire application operate exclusively in a web
context. To at least somewhat mitigate the related risks stemming from having
to trust the cryptographic logic delivered by a web server every time you use
the service, trust-on-first-use was achieved by mangling the living daylights
out of HPKP in tandem with service workers in order to persist barebones
codesigning logic used for validating cryptographic packages delivered from
the web service. Alas...

All of this is to say that there have been multiple parties involved in
addressing this challenge, each one thinking from novel angles in an effort to
mitigate the risks posed by the threat of sanctions against secure messaging.
As it stands, it appears there's now a rather glaring weakness: if a nation-
state decides as much, they can just twist the arms of the walled gardens
supporting your secure messaging client in order to:

1) deny access generally, reducing or eliminating the growth of the target
space and improving target acquisition,

2) persist known vulnerabilities just long enough to exploit against a target.

Telegram has been criticized again and again for their security hygiene and
for their architectural decisions. Signal's seen some of that heat quite
recently, and I raise both of these because they speak pretty strongly to the
bullets above: there's a chance we're seeing a live demonstration by a
preeminent world power against one of the few tools dissidents are using to
_literally_ stay alive.

If this demonstration succeeds without any sort of significant blowback (in
the form of corporate or popular resistance or some other subversion or
mitigation of the attack), there's nothing to stop any other major _party_
from trying it, regardless of whether they're a nation-state.

\---

Anyway, I'm keen on a deeper discussion here. Maybe the tinfoil hat's been a
bit corrosive to my brain; counter-arguments are welcomed.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
I guess my brain is too small to grok this all in one go but are you saying
that

Russia is applying pressure to Apple (what pressure?) that prevents Apple App
Stores in _all_ countries from accepting a new update of Telegram

I don't get this - why is Telegram not releasing updates in a UK or Japanese
region? What pressure (besides the local russian court system) is being
applied here

\---

In general yes I expect that app stores are the / a weak point in mobile
encryption messaging, but it is only at the level of _major_ player threat
model. These things are good enough for use against all but a State level
actor targeting _you_ specifically (at which point leaving the country is
probably good, if tardy, advice)

~~~
JumpCrisscross
We don't have any evidence, apart from Durov's allegations, that Telegram's
situation with Apple has anything to do with Russia.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
So this is Telegram saying "oh we forgot to update for GDPR because err ...
umm ... err ... Russia!"?

I mean we presumably do have Russian court Records from April, records that
the Roskomnadzor went to court for encryption keys, and that there have been
"shutting down entire segments of the Russian internet. Many small
organizations, including language schools and museums, have been blocked as
collateral damage." And evidence there was a demonstration with paper
aeroplanes?

I am happy to accept that Durov has an axe to grind but Russia does look like
a good suspect to start looking at first.

~~~
shkkmo
There is certainly evidence that Russia has a problem with Telegram. There is
also evidence that Russia is trying to get Telegram removed from the app
store.

What we don't have any evidence for is that these are in any way related to
Telegram's inability to get updates approved by Apple. This is speculation
based on the above claims which do have evidence.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Fair enough - this is essentially my own question above - what pressure can be
applied by Russia to Apple to prevent App Store UK getting updates? If you
have a legal dispute in country A does the prevent all counties getting
updates?

~~~
Muromec
> Fair enough - this is essentially my own question above - what pressure can
> be applied by Russia to Apple to prevent App Store UK getting updates?

They can fine the company, ban import of Apple products into the country,
block access to App Store, etc. Yes, that same agency.

It doesn't even matter _which_ regional section of App Store Telegram would
use to publish app - users in need can switch between them and censorship
agency can't see which part of App Store you are connecting to.

So Russian censorship agency's end goal should be to remove Telegram from all
regional sections of App Store and use whatever legal or not-so-legal excuses
to do so. Agency in question (Роскомнадзор) is notorious for their bullshit
excuses to ban imports of food from Ukraine during all the trade wars even
before all European food was legally banned for import.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Let me rephrase- yes they can impose a fine, harass employees, ban imports of
iphones, but what can they do that will _work_ \- ie force apple to ban a well
known app from the app store innsuch a blatant fashion.

Apple would be insane to comply with these demands, because it just opens the
door for every other regieme to do the same.

So ... is Apple stopping Telegram from sending the updates? Are they doing it
_because_ of Russia pressure?

or is there more?

~~~
Muromec
>Apple would be insane to comply with these demands, because it just opens the
door for every other regieme to do the same.

But they already did in China, right?

~~~
lifeisstillgood
This it seems is something i missed - they banned VPN apps?

~~~
detaro
Yes: [http://www.siliconbeat.com/2017/11/22/apple-can-promote-
free...](http://www.siliconbeat.com/2017/11/22/apple-can-promote-freedom-
expression-china-block-vpn-apps/)

------
zapita
Presumably Telegram doesn't know for sure why Apple is blocking updates...
They are most likely getting stonewalled, with Apple not responding to any of
their requests for information.

Telegram suspects that Apple is trying to appease Russian censors while
keeping a low profile and plausible deniability. Perhaps Apple is buying time
and showing goodwill to Russia while they negotiate a deal - who knows?

Acting on their suspicion, Telegram makes this announcement, putting pressure
on Apple to unblock updates, or at least to stop stonewalling them.

It's a clever use of PR as a tactical weapon. And assuming that Apple was
indeed stonewalling Telegram (extremely likely knowing Apple), I think it's
perfectly justified.

~~~
eridius
Your assumptions are probably wrong. Most likely Telegram _does_ know why
they're being blocked, they just aren't saying because they want people to
assume malfeasance on Apple's part and they're hoping bad PR will convince
Apple to approve whatever it is that they're currently rejecting.

~~~
zapita
You might be right... I think it's fair to say we're both guessing.

To me it just doesn't seem logical to resort to such a "nuclear option" over a
review disagreement, instead of just complying, negotiating, or at least
working around the problem in a creative technical way. It's not like Telegram
is changing in some fundamental way since the last review... What could Apple
be telling Telegram that is such a massive showstopper?

~~~
eridius
A lot of companies do tend to reach for the "nuclear option" of crying to the
press when getting rejected even though they haven't yet gone through all the
steps of trying to resolve the issue privately.

> _What could Apple be telling Telegram that is such a massive showstopper?_

Good question. I don't know. There are a lot of possibilities here and it's
impossible for us to know what without Telegram telling us the actual
rejection reason.

~~~
zapita
> > _What could Apple be telling Telegram that is such a massive showstopper?_

> _Good question. I don 't know. There are a lot of possibilities here_

I can't think of any. Can you name one?

~~~
eridius
Telegram wants to introduce a feature where they request access to your
address book, request access to your photo library, search your photo library
using CoreML for photos that appear to be indecent, and start sending them to
all of your contacts. Telegram is really adamant that this is an excellent
feature and they refuse to remove it when Apple denies them over it.

Or probably something else. But you get the idea. Telegram could have tried to
introduce behavior that violated Apple rules. Or they could have snuck
existing rules violations past Apple in the past and Apple finally noticed.

------
Shank
Honestly, I don't understand why there are still details missing from this
story. Durov is willing to share that Telegram hasn't been able to ship
updates, but not the full reason.

Have they been actively rejected (and thus, provided a rejection reason)? Or
have Apple just stopped approving their updates silently?

If it's the former, I don't know what app store guideline says "well, Telegram
is banned in Russia, and so no more updates." If it's the latter, then I can
understand the frustration -- but we don't know which it is. This nuance is
important.

For all we know, the answer is the former, and the app store rejection reasons
are for completely unrelated issues. But as per usual, we don't know the full
story.

~~~
taurath
The certification process tends to only look for things that are Bad for Apple
or Google, as almost anyone who's tried getting a big app update certified.
Meanwhile, 1000 iterations of shareware calculators that you have to pay $4 to
unlock the number 9 are accepted frequently. There's so many clearly crap apps
out there that don't get a second look.

~~~
ReverseCold
> shareware calculators that you have to pay $4 to unlock the number 9

This is probably made up/for comedic effect, but just in case it isn't, do you
have a link?

~~~
taurath
Usually it’s not like that, but they’ll show ads on a calculator that
completely matches the native calculator, until you pony up.

Other examples are todo lists that only allow you one group unless you pay
them.

------
masonlee
Does this dispute imply that Apple backdoors its own iMessage end-to-end
encryption on states' request?

~~~
amatecha
It's entirely possible, I'd speculate. I once called Apple tech support for
help with my iPhone. So they could see what was going on right on my phone,
they were able to remotely request a "screen sharing" session, which I had to
click "Allow" on a dialog on my phone to approve. One can imagine that such an
approval dialog is not actually required in a technical sense, and
_theoretically_ a screen share could be remotely started without any such
dialog/notification.

~~~
robotkdick
While true they can access a phone based on the user opting in, there's likely
a high degree of "security" around how and when this can occur including the
necessity of a user opting in.

Tim Cook has taken a very public stance on privacy and the addition of police-
unfriendly encryption of data. So, there's much to lose if news were to come
out undermining that position.

He probably would not be going so far out on a limb personally if the reality
of the privacy/security/encryption were just for PR. His integrity is
dependent on that position being true.

Slowing things down for political purposes in entirely another matter, and
well within the realm of probability.

~~~
Moter8
I know this is not really on topic, but forensic companies like Cellebrite can
unlock/get the data from almost any iOS Device.

Remember, those were the guys that unlocked the San Bernardino iPhone.

Android full encryptions are harder/impossible for them, a Cellebrite person
told me half a year ago.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_d...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_dispute)

[https://www.cellebrite.com/en/products/ufed-
ultimate/](https://www.cellebrite.com/en/products/ufed-ultimate/)

~~~
saagarjha
> forensic companies like Cellebrite can unlock/get the data from almost any
> iOS Device

I don't think this is true. Essentially Cellebrite gets ahold of an unpatched
exploit that Apple then quickly fixes; that's far cry from being able to
unlock "almost any iOS Device".

------
codedokode
Please note that Telegram is not a Russian company; it is registered in Great
Britain. Russian government doesn't have any jurisdiction over it.

Also, russian users are less than 10% of Telegram userbase.

So now Apple is putting sanctions upon a British company just because Russia
says so.

This sets a dangerous precedent. What will we see tomorrow? China, Thailand,
Iran and North Korea kicking apps they don't like out of App Store? Apple
banning apps on political grounds?

~~~
veidr
Apple already does ban apps on political grounds, even pretty innocuous just-
the-facts type apps:

[https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/538kan/apple-
just...](https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/538kan/apple-just-banned-
the-app-that-tracks-us-drone-strikes-again)

And yes, I think you are likely right: we will see apps banned at the behest
of the Chinese government, given the size of their market. (North Korea,
perhaps not.)

Apple painted themselves into this corner when they decided to become the
gatekeeper of what iPhone users are allowed to install.

~~~
y_molodtsov
We already see that, but it’s more subtle. They aren’t banning those apps
worldwide, just delist them from their Chinese store.

------
floatingatoll
The App Store guidelines [5] indicate that, with regard to a single app, the
app author (Telegram) "must comply with all legal requirements". Telegram
agreed to this requirement when they published their latest update two months
ago, and so Telegram – not Apple – is liable for illegality.

Apple received a notice of illegality from Russia regarding Telegram, a third-
party app. This notice was inappropriately delivered to Apple, who currently
has no responsibility for Telegram. Telegram's compliance with Russian law is
not Apple's problem unless a Russian court orders Apple to de-list Telegram.
Until such an order occurs, Apple has no reason to de-list Telegram.

Therefore, I believe that Apple did three things:

[1] Apple temporarily suspended Telegram app updates worldwide after receiving
a notice of illegality.

[2] Apple immediately forwarded the notice of illegality to Telegram, without
any assertion of validity.

[3] Apple notified Telegram that they may resume updates by either declaring
in writing to Apple that Telegram is legal in Russia or de-listing Telegram in
Russia.

And Telegram did no things:

[4] Telegram has refused to declare in writing to Apple that Telegram is legal
in Russia, and has refused to de-list Telegram in Russia.

And Telegram, after two months of refusing to act on [3], is trying to
pressure Apple into giving up on [3] using the "woe is me" GDPR excuse.

[5] [https://developer.apple.com/app-
store/review/guidelines/#leg...](https://developer.apple.com/app-
store/review/guidelines/#legal)

~~~
codedokode
> "must comply with all legal requirements"

Every country has its own legal requirements. As Telegram is a British company
I assume it must comply only with British laws, right?

~~~
floatingatoll
Telegram may absolutely ignore non-British laws and refuse to concern itself
with them. Independent of laws, Apple may refuse Telegram access to the App
Store if a guideline is not met.

------
driverdan
This is why I will never own an Apple phone. No one should have the power to
decide what can and can't be installed on your devices.

~~~
jonny_eh
So you've never owned a game console either?

~~~
dingo_bat
That's not very far fetched.

------
glhaynes
Tweet from Founder/CEO of Telegram:
[https://twitter.com/durov/status/1002653210245586944](https://twitter.com/durov/status/1002653210245586944)
("Thank you @Apple and @tim_cook for letting us deliver the latest version of
@telegram to millions of users, despite the recent setbacks.")

------
mnm1
What else do people expect from a closed ecosystem? Vendor bowing down to
disreputable nation-states' requests. Check. Out of date apps with
vulnerabilities. Check. Impossible to verify security of said system or apps.
Check. Complete opaqueness from the vendor. Check. And this is from a vendor
that supposedly values both security and privacy ... not that any others are
any better.

------
thotaway
Theory 1: It’s because Russia, a market with a very small iOS user base, can
pressure Apple into doing what it wants.

Theory 2: It’s because Telegram raised more than a billion dollars for a
virtual currency that does an end-run around Apple’s in-app payments.

Based on Apple’s past actions, which one is more likely?

~~~
dannyw
The ICO didn't mention anything about doing an end-run around IAPs, and even
so, such functionality isn't integrated in the app.

How can Apple justify penalising something not in an app? Why is the Kindle
app still up, despite the fact that Kindle ebooks don't go through IAP?

------
laveur
From all the articles I have read about this Telegram seems to offer no
evidence to supports its case. Further more it claims its only iOS, and not
macOS. And I personally have gotten at least several updates for at least the
mac version over the past month.

~~~
askvictor
On a Mac you have the option of downloading and installing the app directly
from the Internet rather than from the app store. On iOS you don't, so there
is a clear difference.

~~~
bouvin
My macOS Telegram updated, from the AppStore, 2018-05-31.

~~~
askvictor
My point is that there is no point in blocking any updates on the MacOS
appstore, as it can just be side-loaded.

------
amatecha
"Russia banned Telegram on its territory in April because we refused to
provide decryption keys for all our users’ communications to Russia’s security
agencies"

Why does Telegram have decryption keys for all their users' communications (or
do they)?

~~~
readams
For private chats Telegram uses end-to-end encryption and they cannot read the
chats. Of course, they control the clients though, so they could update their
clients to also send the chats to Russian intelligence and it would be hard
for anyone to notice.

~~~
verroq
Telegram isn't E2E encrypted by default.

You need to choose an "encrypted" chat.

They have been criticised over this for many years now.

~~~
coolspot
Also desktop telegram client doesn't have e2e, only mobile one.

~~~
Qwertie
Which is why I can't use it because most of my messages are sent from desktop.

------
jfornear
If anyone here is interested, I started on a new project called Chatdog
([https://chat.dog](https://chat.dog)) to create an alternative to Telegram,
et al. Telegram forces you to download their app and provide your phone number
to join a room. Chatdog doesn’t require any personal data and can even be used
anonymously!

~~~
egeozcan
But you require scripts from a lot of 3rd parties, which may or may not
respect my privacy.

Maybe consider using a CDN or hosting necessary scripts on your server?

~~~
jfornear
All scripts are on Cloudfront except for when someone shares a YouTube video
or Twitter tweet. Google Analytics and Typekit are the only third-party
scripts that are always loaded. I do need to add UI to allow users to disable
these.

~~~
hundchenkatze
I had to accept a script from platform.twitter.com before I could close the
SignIn/Register modal. Here's a short gif.

[https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/HelplessAlienatedClownanemone...](https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/HelplessAlienatedClownanemonefish)

The app looks great though :)

~~~
jfornear
Thanks for reporting this! Yes, apparently the Twitter script is always loaded
also. I need to add logic to only load it when needed.

------
cocktailpeanuts
I'm surprised that nobody is talking about how Telegram raised pre-ICO of
billions of dollars even when it was obvious that this type of censorship will
be possible.

Mobile apps should not do ICO, period. It's irresponsible for someone to try
stealing uneducated people's money while promising something that's impossible
to achieve.

Realistically speaking there are only two players in the market: Google and
Apple, both of which will happily comply with governments and regulators since
they have no business in allowing gray area businesses, and that's a good
thing.

However when you raise ICO, you're basically promising the censorship
resistant future while fully knowing that it's impossible to achieve what you
promised because your app is built on top of these centralized platforms.

This is on a completely different level in terms of scam factor when compared
to naive idiots promising things like "putting grass-fed cows on the
blockchain", because literally it's impossible to build a censorship-
resistant, decentralized mobile app and they are the ones who know this the
best.

I point this out because it looks as though all the press coverage seem to be
focused on how Russia and Apple is censoring Telegram and Telegram is the
victim, when Russia and Apple did nothing different from what they used to do.
Russia has always been this way, and Apple has always tried its best to fight
for user privacy but did make compromises when they really had to. It's great
that Apple is doing its best to fight for user privacy but to be frank, Apple
shouldn't be the one to blame here.

It's Telegram who decided to promote itself as a "censorship resistant
decentralized blockchain application" to raise billions of dollars, and they
got to this position because of this stance they had to take in order to raise
the money. The only losers in this case are the idiots who invested in
Telegram's ICO.

~~~
scosman
"you're basically promising the censorship resistant future" where did
telegram say anything remotely like that? They did an ICO for a utility coin.
They have been honest about being centralized. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it
seems like you're putting words in their mouth and accusing them of theft for
not meeting your fabricated expectations.

~~~
cocktailpeanuts
ICO is short for Initial Coin Offering. And the coin is cryptocurrency.
Cryptocurrencies are only valuable when they are not censorable. This is why
there's a controversy around coins like XRP (from Ripple) because most of the
coins are owned by Ripple and their architecture is designed in a way that
they can very well censor transactions.

But even Ripple pales in comparison to something like Telegram, because
Telegram is a mobile chat app, which is as centralized as you can get. Not
only does it depend on iOS and Android, but also all push notifications must
go through APN (Apple Push Notification) or FCM(Google Messaging). In fact,
messaging apps are arguably the most centralized apps out there because of
these features. And this is why it's so easy to censor these apps.

So if your app can easily be censored, and if your coin is useless if your
users can't use the app, what else do you think they were claiming?

~~~
tylerlastovich
I am willing to bet that you haven't read the Telegram white paper.
([https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ucUeKg_NiR8RxNAonb8Q55jZha0...](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ucUeKg_NiR8RxNAonb8Q55jZha03WC0O/view))
They didn't raise all that money to build out their chat app. They are looking
to make a digital currency that can handle volume and is practical for day-to-
day purchases, compared to the primarily speculatory coins that exist right
now. The $1.7B they raised came from 175 accredited investors that purchased
the entire supply of utility tokens in the pre-sale.

------
Angostura
Is Signal reporting any issues?

~~~
giodamelio
Signal is down for me right now. I am also seeing lot's of people mentioning
the same thing on Twitter.

------
sebleon
This is likely a false accusation.

If Apple acquiesced to Russia’s demands, Apple would have: 1) removed Telegram
from the App Store in Russia, and 2) prevented Telegram from using the Apple
Push Notification Service to distribute non-blocked IP addresses to clients.

More likely, updates are being rejected for another infraction. Telegram
should publish the App Store reviewer’s criticisms publicly, and provide more
context before making public denouncements.

~~~
wetpaws
Knowing Apple I would be very surprised that it is a false accusation.

~~~
sebleon
Interesting, you don’t think this is an odd punishment if this was about
Russia?

------
konart
At the same time alternative clients are getting their updates just fine (like
Teleplus and Loopy).

~~~
saagarjha
There are a multitude of reason why this is the case. It might be that
Telegram in particular did something that pissed Apple off, or that Apple is
ignoring third-party clients.

------
ezoe
If they seriously believe that protecting customers security is important,
they shall not encourage their user to use Apple products. Android is also bad
for this.

------
dang
Discussion at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17195072](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17195072).

Edit: actually that article contains much less information and the discussion
is correspondingly less substantive, so I've taken the 'dupe' marker off the
current post. Carry on.

