Whoever owns the information owns the world.
N. Rothschild.
And I gave my heart to know wisdom and to know madness and stupidity: I learned that this too is a vexation of the spirit; because in much wisdom there is much sorrow; and whoever multiplies knowledge multiplies sorrow.
King Solomon. Bible. The Book of Ecclesiastes
The epic with the long-suffering messenger has been going on for about a year now, and things are still there – despite all the efforts of various departments, 'Telegram' continues to work and delight its users with functionality and convenience.
Among the measures of influence that were used to block the objectionable creation of Durov, one can recall the courts at which they demanded from Pavel to give the keys (and those who voted for this demand do not even know what it is), and the prohibition of activities on the territory of Russia, and an indiscriminate wave of IP address blocking, which led to service disruptions for companies that had nothing to do with this Roskomnadzor crusade against windmills.
Finally, after a series of failures, Deputy Minister of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media Oleg Ivanov spoke about a certain 'wunderwaffe' called DPI (Deep Packet Inspection – a software and hardware solution that allows you to filter network packets by their content), which, in his opinion, once and must end forever the main threat to Russia's cybersecurity – the hated messenger.
Judging by the capabilities of the DPI hardware and software solution, this can really help solve the problem of saving the face of the Telegram fighters, but also only for a while, which means it will not solve the problem itself. For a while, because Telegram developers are unlikely to sit still and do nothing. But this is already speculation and assumptions, and therefore, unlike any 'supervision', we cannot afford to operate with the categories 'if only if only' as an assessment of the effectiveness of decisions made and just wait for the result, whatever it may be.
But today it is not about the effectiveness of certain decisions, since a lot of materials have been written about this in different publications. Today I would like to speculate about why block 'Telegram' and who benefits from it.
And here there will be a place for the very conjectures, reasoning and assumptions, since reliable facts on this issue are unlikely to be obtained. The point is that information and knowledge are not the same thing.
In our information age, a huge stream of information pours on us from speakers, headphones, screens and small screens, which ultimately forms our picture of the world, our perception of the surrounding reality, and therefore ourselves. And, alas, in this vast ocean of information it is becoming increasingly difficult to find knowledge about what is happening around us. I mean that our knowledge can only be a version of what is happening, which we have created for ourselves, or even worse – someone's version, created especially for us.
But rather lengthy reasoning and conspiracy theories, let's move on to our own guesses and delusions.
Versions
Version 1 – secure
The main version of the reason for blocking Telegram is the need to protect Russian citizens from terrorism and drugs and the reasoning that since Telegram does not give the keys, then both of them are in abundance in the cart.
This can also include arguments that constantly pop up on the network that since the special services cannot read the correspondence of Telegram users (they did not give the keys), then terrorists and drug dealers have multiplied in it like mushrooms after rain, and feel at ease there. planning their dark deeds, giggling disgustingly at attempts to expose them. At the same time, the same special services say that they are not going to read the users' correspondence, but only want to have a reading tool to respond to threats.
And if the version about terrorists can somehow be far-fetched, then about the drug trade this is pure comedy. If you think in this way, then let's prohibit the legs at tables and chairs, otherwise it can be very painful to hit your little toe on them.
In general, in order to understand whether the version about protection against threats has the right to life, you need to ask yourself two questions:
The first question – what prevents a criminal element from using other instant messengers and social networks for their affairs, simply encrypting their messages using the encryption tools available to messengers, or simply using pre-agreed passphrases and allegories?
The second question – what prevents the special services from acting within the framework of the law today, gaining access to users' correspondence by a court decision? After all, the creators of 'Telegram' have never denied their willingness to cooperate in this way, and even emphasized their desire to act in the legal field.
In this situation, with all the desire, it is impossible to believe the tales that having 'encryption keys' in hand, my correspondence will not be read just like that, for the sake of curiosity.
After answering these two questions, everyone will make a decision for himself whether to consider the version about 'for your own good' to be consistent.
Version 2 – Demonstration Whipping
In this case, 'Telegram' has become a platform for testing tools that should ensure this very cybersecurity. In light of the emergence of the initiative about the sovereign Internet (sounds like an oxymoron), this version gets additional points in the struggle for existence.
The bottom line is that many cybercrime fighters have little idea how to do this and what exactly they will have to face if such a fight begins in full. For this, and also to create the correct perception of organs and their image, it was necessary to practice with someone who violates the regulations and is not ready to cooperate.
It is difficult to judge how much Telegram became a successful candidate for the role of a whipping boy and whether he was this boy at all, but if this version is considered correct, then the choice was clearly unsuccessful. It was not possible to win with a swoop, and now we are talking about saving face by those who so bravely reported about the quick victory of the forces of light. Perhaps the enemy turned out to be much stronger than he had seen at the beginning. But if this is so, the main thing now is to finish what we started, because, as old Nietzsche used to say (free interpretation), everything that does not kill me will only make me stronger.
Version 3 – conspiracy
But a situation with disinformation is also possible, when an appearance of a struggle is created, aimed at increasing confidence in the tool, in this case, to the messenger, as a stronghold of security, jealously keeping the secrets of its users. What for? So that everyone would believe that this is so, and stop hiding, and start writing to each other whatever they think.
If we take this version for the truth, then it turns out very conveniently – we create for 'Telegram' an image of a safe means of transmitting confidential information, demonstrate a demonstrative inability to cope with a bad messenger, and then, when users (and this is the most progressive, and therefore often reactionary part of the population ) believe in it, we begin to use the results of our labor. How to use? Here, only your imagination is able to answer this question.
Conclusion and conclusions
All these versions have the right to life, just as they can turn out to be absolute nonsense that has nothing to do with reality.
However, one should not forget the precepts of Agent Mulder that the truth is somewhere nearby, and it may turn out that all these options arise from one another and complement each other, creating a complete picture of what is happening.
The funny thing in this situation is that, despite the chaotic throwing of various departments designed to monitor and prevent, Telegram continues to work properly and delight its users.
Yes, some time ago, when a huge number of IP addresses were unreasonably blocked by one not particularly effective department, some users noted interruptions in the messenger's work, which is why a part of the especially impressionable Telegram audience began to refuse to use the messenger in favor of others , more flexible ways of communication, but at the moment everything works stably, and there are no difficulties.
And this either speaks of the qualifications of the programmers working on both sides of the barricades, or adds points to the conspiracy theory.
Alas, exhaustive honest answers to these questions are unlikely to be obtained, so you and I can only watch what is happening with a cool head, carefully analyze all the incoming information and not take our word for it, but think with your own head, all the more, blocking the messenger is nonsense compared to the sovereign Russian Internet that threatens us.