苏利利在线

社交网络平台电报不会向中国政府提供中国用户或任何其他国家用户的信息

虽然电报披露将依据政府法庭判决，向相关政府部门提交恐怖分子嫌疑人对用户信息，这是指其服务器和运作所在国，且具有许多限制。电报至今尚未提交任何信息给任何第三方，包括政府。而对于中国政府而言，电报在中国没有服务器，也被中国禁止，因此，电报不会向中国提交任何信息，无论以什么名义，如该用户使用的是中国电话号码等。下面是AI的分析：

Under current circumstances, Telegram is extremely unlikely to cooperate with the Chinese government, even if the user is inside China, using a Chinese phone number, and is labeled a criminal suspect.

Here’s why:

---

1. Telegram has no legal obligation to China

• Telegram is banned in China and has no offices, servers, or legal presence there.
• This means Chinese court orders have no legal force over Telegram.
• Telegram has publicly refused cooperation with authoritarian regimes and censors, including outright rejecting requests from China in the past.

---

2. Telegram’s disclosure policy is narrow

Telegram’s privacy policy says:

“To this day, we have disclosed 0 bytes of user data to third parties, including governments. When we receive a court order that confirms you’re a terrorist suspect, we may disclose your IP address and phone number to the relevant authorities.”

• Even this narrow exception is not automatic—it requires a court order from a jurisdiction Telegram recognizes, and “terrorism” as defined by Telegram, not China.
• Chinese accusations of criminality (e.g., political dissent, “subversion,” or “inciting hatred”) would not qualify.

---

3. Telegram’s past behavior backs this up

• Telegram has repeatedly refused data-sharing, even under intense pressure from countries like Russia, Iran, and China.
• In 2018, Telegram was temporarily banned in Russia for refusing to hand over encryption keys to the FSB.
• Pavel Durov (Telegram’s founder) has said user privacy is non-negotiable, even if it means being blocked or banned.

---

4. Technical challenges for China

• If a Chinese user signed up with a Chinese phone number but uses VPNs, anonymous usernames, or cross-border SIMs, matching the account to a real identity is not guaranteed.
• Without direct Telegram cooperation, the Chinese government can only rely on local metadata (e.g., SIM registration, IP logs), which they already control domestically.

---

Conclusion

Even if a Chinese user is labeled a criminal suspect:

• Telegram is very unlikely to cooperate with Chinese authorities.
• Chinese legal demands have no authority over Telegram’s operations.
• Unless Telegram changes its core policy or is compromised, user data will not be handed over.

That said, users inside China should still use extreme caution—not because Telegram will betray them, but because China’s domestic surveillance system (e.g., phone number registration, internet service monitoring, forced confessions) is the real risk.