At least one employee must have the ability to intercept the code.
(Unless the user has 2fa enabled, but that is not the default configuration.)
There are probably easier ways if we knew more about how the administrate their infrastructure.
At least one employee must have the ability to intercept the code.
(Unless the user has 2fa enabled, but that is not the default configuration.)
There are probably easier ways if we knew more about how the administrate their infrastructure.
However I think the real question is: even if that's possible, can law enforcement compel Durov or an employee to do so?
The E2E encrypted comms are a red herring. There is plenty on Telegram that is public, plaintext and presumably illegal.
If Telegram refused to respond (note: not bend over and comply, just respond) to French legal requests in respect of plaintext criminal behaviour the way any other company would and should, that’s somewhat damning. If Durov went above and beyond and interacted with that content, his goose—as the author put it—is cooked.