Tuesday, June 11, 2019

No, the Telegram never said there was no hacker attack on Lava Jet

Publication of the Telegram on social networks was misinterpreted by the press, generating a wave of misinformation about the case.

No, the Telegram never said there was no hacker attack on Lava Jet
No, the Telegram never said there was no hacker attack on Lava Jet.

The Digital Eye published last Monday, 10, a series of techniques hackers that would allow the theft of the messages of the cell phones of operation Lava Jato, that were exposed in a matter of the site The Intercept. This Tuesday, the Telegram expressed to cancel one of the hypotheses: that it was not its infrastructure that was hacked.

However, many read the posting of the platform on Twitter in the wrong way. The Telegram had been questioned by a Brazilian journalist about his service being attacked, which from the outset seemed unlikely. When the company says "in fact, there is no evidence of any hack. It probably must have been malware or someone not using a 2-step verification password, "she is defending herself against some charges that began to pop up that messages could have been stolen directly from the platform cloud.

At no point does the Telegram say that the leaks are not the result of a hacker attack. The messages may have been leaked by hacking the Telegram accounts of Lava Jet members, which is by no means impossible. There are multiple methods for this type of action, with different levels of sophistication, and success can be made more accessible if users do not configure the application's two-step authentication password. Hacking the user does not mean cutting the Telegram; the use is not responsible when the user does not take basic care with their own security.

A basic example: Let's assume someone had access to their personal emails in Gmail. If this access was made through a successful attack on Google's servers, that means the company was hacked. If access came about because someone discovered your password, perhaps by finding the password you wrote down on a post-it, or inferred from information you spotted on your Facebook, it means that you were hacked, not Google.

The fact that non-technology media misinterpret the Telegram publication helps to further confuse this issue. The Twitter publication of UOL News implies that there was no hacking attack in action, which would indicate internal conflict. There were more than 1,700 retweets in the original post, and other big profiles like journalist Monica Bergamo are among the people who went through the information with thousands of more retweets.

The news on the UOL website has been corrected to correctly portray the situation, stating that the Telegram does not say at any point that there has ever been a hacker attack. However, many people even open the news to notice that there have been changes in the text and the original publication on Twitter is still active, allowing it to be freely passed on by other ordinary people and far-reaching influencers.

Faced with the repercussion of the misleading interpretation on its publication, Telegram's own social networks have expressed themselves to try to deny the case. "I did not say that cell phones were not hacked. Someone asked 'The Telegram was hacked?', And I said no, the Telegram was not hacked, "says the official profile of the application on Twitter.



Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home