Analysis: Pavel Durov's arrest in Paris may have consequences for Telegram, its users and other social media platforms
Last weekend, Pavel Durov, the Russia-born founder and CEO of the messaging app Telegram, was arrested at Le Bourget airport near Paris, by French authorities. He was taken in for questioning by investigators over the platform’s possible complicity in a number of alleged crimes. On August 28th, Durov was officially charged in court on six counts and was banned from leaving France.
Why has Durov’s arrest caused shock waves in the tech community? And how can we interpret the possible consequences of France’s actions for Telegram, its users, and other social media platforms?
Who is Durov and what is Telegram?
A large part of Telegram’s origin story rests on Durov, who is also the founder and ex-CEO of Russia’s most-popular social network, VKontakte (VK). In 2014, Durov was forced to sell his shares and resigned as the company’s CEO following his continued refusal to cooperate with the Russian authorities by sharing user information.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Morning Ireland, Telegram CEO Pavel Durov arrested in Paris
Claiming pressure from Russian authorities, Durov left Russia and announced Telegram’s launch soon thereafter. It is currently one of the most popular messaging services in the world and has claimed over 900 million users globally.
Telegram has cultivated an ethos centred on internet freedom and libertarian values, which have helped it cement a loyal fan base in Russia and beyond. In its public-facing communications, the platform highlights support for internet privacy as one of its key priorities, claiming to protect "private conversations from snooping third parties".
This anti-censorship and pro-privacy stance has made it popular with anti-government activists and protesters in authoritarian states, from Belarus to Iran to Myanmar, who appreciate its relative anonymity and security. But Telegram’s lax approach to moderation and focus on allegedly "secure" communications has also made it a favourite among extremist and terrorist groups, from ISIS to the far right.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's This Week, Dr Tanya Lokot from DCU on the problems facing social media platforms like X and Telegam
Is Telegram an encrypted messenger?
Telegram’s core functionality is quite similar to that of other messaging services, such as WhatsApp, Viber, or iMessage. Uniquely, Telegram also offers group chats and channels, making it at once a useful tool for one-on-one communication, group organisation and mobilisation and a platform for one-to-many broadcasting.
Though Telegram is often referred to as an "encrypted messenger", the reality is far murkier. The platform has a unique approach to encryption: regular chats use client-server/server-client encryption and are stored encrypted on Telegram’s own cloud servers. This means regular user communications are not fully encrypted by default (like they are in WhatsApp or Signal), and users have to manually enable the "secret chat" feature to use end-to-end encryption so that only the intended recipients should be able to read the messages.
Unlike other services, Telegram uses its own custom encryption protocol, MTProto 2.0 (WhatsApp and Signal, for instance, use the certified Signal Protocol by Open Whisper Systems). This approach, where end-to-end encryption is partial at best, and the use of a proprietary encryption protocol have made Telegram the target of intense criticism from cryptography experts and digital rights activists.
From DW, what makes Telegram so attractive for illegal activities?
What is France’s issue with Telegram?
While the initial charges released by the Paris' prosecutor's office were not explicitly against Durov himself, Durov was directly charged in court by the Paris prosecutor's office on six counts. These include complicity in allowing his platform to be used for criminal activities, lack of cooperation with French authorities and provision of encrypted communication technology without proper documentation. The Telegram CEO was not remanded in custody, but placed under judicial supervision, banned from leaving French territory and required to pay a €5m bail deposit.
Some of the charges relate to allowing the platform to be used for enabling illegal transactions, such as distribution of "pornographic images of minors," "acquisition, transport, possession, offering or transfer of drugs" and refusal to provide information or documents necessary for an investigation at the request of authorities. Indeed, there is evidence of such activities taking place on Telegram, with little to no moderation.
Notably, the charges do not mention terrorism-related offences. Telegram has been and remains a popular application for jihadists and other terrorist groups, though the platform has made efforts to remove some of the terrorist content and communities. Otherwise, the app has mostly pushed back against law enforcement requests, though it has faced criticism for selective engagement with state censorship demands, for example, in Iran and Russia.
From NBC News, French president Emmanuel Macron said the arrest of Telegram founder Pavel Durov was not politically motivated
There are also charges relating to encryption technology violations, tied to France's import controls regime for cryptographic technologies. Given the platform’s proprietary encryption protocol, this is hardly surprising. Within the EU, most technologies incorporating encryption are also classified as dual-use goods (when not military items) and are subject to export (and sometimes import) control.
In France, however, encrypted items are subject to either a declaration or an authorisation process, prior to being imported or exported to and from the country. The Agence Nationale de la Sécurité des Systèmes d'Information (ANSSI) records these declarations and reviews the authorisation requests. Durov’s lawyer David-Olivier Kaminski claimed Telegram had complied fully with European digital regulations and its moderation standards were on par with other social media platforms.
What does Durov’s arrest mean for tech regulation?
Telegram has faced its share of punitive state action, including being banned in Russia, Iran and Brazil, among others. However, most attempts at state censorship or removing specific groups of actors engaged in illegal activity have resorted to take down notices or IP-based blocking of the platform. Durov’s detention and charges in France is the first time the platform’s CEO - who holds French, Emirati, Russian and St Kitts and Nevis citizenships - has been personally affected. However, it remains to be seen how long the investigation will continue and what outcome it will ultimately have.
Despite cultivating a public aura of "free speech warrior", Durov himself has acknowledged that he is first and foremost "a tech entrepreneur, not as a politician or philosopher", as evidenced by Telegram’s efforts to attract investors and forays into the cryptocurrency business. Digital rights advocacy groups have stressed Telegram is "no model for corporate responsibility". Access Now criticised Telegram’s "lack of clear and transparent policies" when it comes to content moderation, and its lack of workable support channels and accessible remedy for abuses on the platform.
From CNN, the arrest of the Telegram boss in Fance has sparked a debate about free speech online
The French investigation into Telegram seems to be a message to platforms that the EU is getting more serious about holding them accountable. This is in the context of the EU's toughened stance on platform accountability for illegal speech, content moderation and user safety, apparent in the Digital Services Act,
In light of such escalation, platform owners may be more likely to rethink how they do business in countries with stronger regulatory systems and invest more in content moderation or eradicating illegal activity. But holding platforms to high standards of accountability also requires states themselves to strictly adhere to the relevant rule of law and procedural safeguards, as well as human rights standards, in dealing with tech companies. Though media hype around Durov’s high-profile arrest may get the attention of other platform CEOs, EU states would be wise to refrain from using particularly heavy-handed tactics that might be incompatible with the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality.
As for Telegram, it will undoubtedly benefit from the media coverage of Durov’s arrest. The hope is that the platform will now engage seriously with investigators and do more than release performative statements. As a powerful technological and political actor, it must beef up its transparency, security and moderation practices to make sure users can trust the service they use, and not simply rely on blind faith in the mythology surrounding its founder.
Follow RTÉ Brainstorm on WhatsApp and Instagram for more stories and updates
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
