does it also remove the backdoors?

Join https://t.me/materialgram_chat to know more and get involved

>>106555444
>>106555588
checked, with this said, fuck off shill, 64gram already exists.

let's see the real winner
>>106555555

>>106555588
The source is on github licensed under gpl2 and it strips away proprietory binary blobs too, so no backdoors, period.

>>106555614
>64gram exists
Good luck using an app made by a bipolar chink

https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2024/08/25/telegram-is-not-really-an-encrypted-messaging-app/
thoughts?

https://mtpsym.github.io/
>Security Analysis of Telegram
>We performed a detailed security analysis of the encryption offered by the popular Telegram messaging platform. As a result of our analysis, we found several cryptographic weaknesses in the protocol, from technically trivial and easy to exploit to more advanced and of theoretical interest.

>>106555640
>>106555673
telegram is not secure yes
but this is not a client, fork issue

>>106556583
>telegram is not secure
ok

Bump - Bringing attention to this under rated fork of telegram desktop
>Its truely amazing

>>106555444
>.cursor dir inside the repo
ngmi

>>106555444
>MATERIALGRAM
what a shit name

File: 1755653662817986.png (53 KB, 1402x502)

53 KB PNG

>>106558034
he vibe coded it like a pro kek

>>106558123
Its uses google's material design hence the name
>>106558139
It's a generic warning.
Even the official telegram has this warning if you check it.

>>106558139
If you use the flathub/flatpak version check the app's persion with flatseal, you wont find any sus perms