Telegram创始人杜罗夫在其频道发布声明称：上个月，法国几乎禁止了加密技术。一项要求即时通讯应用安装后门，供警方获取私人信息的法律在参议院获得通过。幸运的是，该法案被国民议会否决了。然而，三天前，巴黎警察局长再次提倡这项法案。国民议会议员们明智地否决了一项可能使法国成为世界上第一个剥夺公民隐私权的国家的法律。即使是许多欧洲人认为缺乏自由的国家，也从未禁止过加密。为什么呢？
因为从技术上讲，不可能保证只有警方才能访问后门。一旦引入，后门就可能被其他方利用——从外国特工到黑客。因此，所有守法公民的私人信息都可能被泄露。该法律旨在防止毒品贩运，但无论如何也无助于打击犯罪。即使主流加密应用程序被后门削弱，犯罪分子仍然可以通过数十个小型应用程序安全地进行通信——而且由于VPN的存在，追踪起来更加困难。这就是为什么，正如我之前所说， Telegram 宁愿退出市场，也不愿利用后门破坏加密技术，侵犯基本人权。与我们的一些竞争对手不同，我们不会为了市场份额而牺牲隐私。
杜罗夫说Telegram 在其 12 年的历史中从未泄露过哪怕一字节的私人消息。根据欧盟《数字服务法》，如果获得有效的法院命令，Telegram 只会披露犯罪嫌疑人的 IP 地址和电话号码，而不会披露任何消息。
上个月，自由终于胜利了。但这也提醒我们：我们必须不断向立法者解释，加密技术并非为保护罪犯而建——它是为了保护普通人的隐私和安全。失去这种保护将是一场悲剧。这场战斗远未结束。本月，欧盟委员会提出了一项类似的倡议，旨在为通讯应用程序添加后门。没有哪个国家能够免受自由的缓慢侵蚀。这些自由每天都在遭受攻击——而我们每天都必须捍卫它们。
杜罗夫在自己Telegram频道发布的原文如下：
😲 Last month, France nearly banned encryption. A law requiring messaging apps to implement a backdoor for police access to private messages was passed by the Senate. Luckily, it was shot down by the National Assembly. Yet 3 days ago the Paris Police Prefect advocated for it again. 🤦♂️
The members of the National Assembly were wise to reject a law that would have made France the first country in the world to strip its citizens of their right to privacy. Even countries that many Europeans view as lacking in freedoms have never banned encryption. Why?
Because it’s technically impossible to guarantee that only the police can access a backdoor. Once introduced, a backdoor can be exploited by other parties — from foreign agents to hackers. As a result, the private messages of all law abiding citizens can get compromised.
Aimed at preventing drug trafficking, the law wouldn’t have helped fight crime anyway. Even if mainstream encrypted apps had been weakened by a backdoor, criminals could still communicate securely through dozens of smaller apps — and become even harder to trace due to VPNs.
This is why, as I’ve said before, Telegram would rather exit a market than undermine encryption with backdoors and violate basic human rights. Unlike some of our competitors, we don’t trade privacy for market share.
In it’s 12-year history, Telegram has never disclosed a single byte of private messages. In accordance with the EU Digital Services Act, if provided with a valid court order, Telegram would only disclose the IP addresses and phone numbers of criminal suspects — not messages.
Last month, freedom prevailed. But it was a reminder: we must keep explaining to lawmakers that encryption isn’t built to protect criminals — it protects the privacy and safety of ordinary people. Losing that protection would be tragic.
The battle is far from over. This month, the European Commission proposed a similar initiative to add backdoors to messaging apps. No country is immune to the slow erosion of freedoms. Every day, those freedoms come under attack — and every day, we must defend them. 🛡