Channel
@CN_Privacy
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
16,612subscribers
+58 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001291783563 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @CN_Privacy |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 30 June 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/CN_Privacy |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 03:03 | 16,612 | +12 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 23:25 | 16,600 | +9 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 00:16 | 16,591 | +16 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 21:51 | 16,575 | +8 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 22:10 | 16,567 | +10 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:53 | 16,557 | +3 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 21:01 | 16,554 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 12 August 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 17 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 20 April 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
1,616 reactions across 20 posts, in 27 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 19.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😁 | 317 | 19.6% | |
| 🤡 | 313 | 19.4% | |
| ❤ | 234 | 14.5% | |
| 💩 | 186 | 11.5% | |
| 😱 | 142 | 8.79% | |
| 🤣 | 81 | 5.01% | |
| 👍 | 78 | 4.83% | |
| 🫡 | 57 | 3.53% | |
| 🖕 | 53 | 3.28% | |
| 🤮 | 42 | 2.60% | |
| 🎉 | 31 | 1.92% | |
| 🤨 | 22 | 1.36% | |
| 👎 | 18 | 1.11% | |
| 🤯 | 8 | 0.495% | |
| 😡 | 6 | 0.371% | |
| 🤬 | 5 | 0.309% | |
| 🥰 | 4 | 0.248% | |
| 🍾 | 3 | 0.186% | |
| 🔥 | 3 | 0.186% | |
| 🥱 | 3 | 0.186% | |
| 7 further kinds | 10 | 0.619% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 1,616reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 12 August 2025 to 20 April 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @CN_Privacy. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 12 August 2025 to 20 April 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
安全研究者揭露 AI 应用潜在“后门”机制，引发隐私争议 2026 年 4 月，专注隐私与网络安全的研究者 Alexander Hanff 发布调查文章，指控 AI 公司 Anthropic 的桌面应用 Claude Desktop 在用户不知情的情况下，向多款基于 Chromium 的浏览器写入配置文件，从而预先启用一种高权限通信机制，引发广泛关注。 根据披露，这些配置文件属于浏览器的 Native Messaging 功能。该机制允许浏览器扩展调用本地程序运行，而这些程序不受浏览器沙箱限制，拥有与用户相同的系统权限。按常规流程，用户需明确授权后才能建立此类连接。但 Hanff 发现，Claude Desktop 在安装或运行过程中已自动写入相关配置文件，并预授权多个扩展 ID，使其可直接调用本地程序。 调查显示，该行为不仅影响已安装的浏览器，还会在未安装的浏览器目录中提前创建配置路径并写入文件，涉及 Chrome、Ed…
😱25❤21😡1
迅雷被曝劫持下载内容：官方 ISO 镜像被替换为捆绑软件的第三方版本 近日，有 B 站网友 @GTX690战术核显卡导弹 发布视频称，在使用 迅雷 下载 Windows 10 等系统 ISO 镜像时，实际获得的文件并非微软官方原版，而是被自动替换为第三方封装镜像，内含大量预装和捆绑软件。 测试显示，迅雷并未校验具体下载源地址，而是仅根据文件名进行识别和替换。即便原始下载链接不存在，迅雷仍可向用户提供所谓的“替代文件”。被替换的镜像中默认捆绑安装 360 浏览器、双核浏览器、WPS、QQ 游戏、夸克等软件，部分浏览器还被锁定广告导航页面。 在下载界面中，这类被替换文件通常被标注为“AI 增强版”，但该提示并不明显，普通用户难以据此判断异常。由于文件并非来自原始发布方，其哈希值与官方镜像必然不一致，只有在用户主动校验校验值时才能发现问题。 安全人士指出，这种行为已不属于简单的“加速优化”，而是对用户下载内容的实质性劫持。在无…
💩121🤡21❤13🤮10🤣7🖕2😡2
微软确认：BitLocker 设备解密密钥可依法向 FBI 提供 微软近日确认，在特定执法请求下，可向 FBI 等执法机构提供存储在微软云端的 BitLocker 设备解密密钥。这一表态引发外界对 Windows 设备加密与用户数据控制权的关注。 据介绍，微软 BitLocker 加密机制允许用户将恢复密钥保存为本地文件，或上传并绑定至微软账户。在 Windows 11 中，设备加密功能默认启用，且在用户登录微软账户的情况下，恢复密钥会自动上传并保存在云端。 美国《福布斯》此前报道称，在一起涉及关岛疫情期间失业补助欺诈案件的调查中，FBI 曾向微软索取目标设备的 BitLocker 恢复密钥。微软在收到合法执法请求后，向 FBI 提供了云端保存的解密密钥，使执法机构得以解密设备并获取相关数据。 微软发言人查尔斯·张伯伦在回应中表示，密钥恢复机制虽然带来便利，但也存在被第三方访问的风险，客户应自行决定如何管理加密密钥。微软…
😁51🤮17❤11😡3🤡2😱2🤔1
海外版小米官方应用商店发现恶意软件，用户需立即自查设备 2026 年 1 月 22 日，安全厂商 Dr.Web 披露，在小米官方应用商店 GetApps 中发现多款携带新型 Android 恶意程序的应用。该恶意软件利用机器学习技术进行隐蔽的广告点击欺诈，即便应用评分较高，也无法保证设备安全。 据介绍，该恶意程序伪装成普通游戏传播，部分应用在最初上架时并未包含恶意代码，而是在后续更新中植入。已确认受感染的应用包括 Theft Auto Mafia、Cute Pet House、Creation Magic World、Amazing Unicorn Party 等，累计下载量达数万次。 该恶意程序使用 Google 开源的 TensorFlow.js 库，通过分析页面视觉内容模拟真实用户操作，而非传统脚本方式，可自动识别并点击广告元素，具备较强隐蔽性。其运行分为“隐身模式”和“监控模式”，后者甚至允许攻击者通过 WebRT…
😁34❤8🤯4👍3💩1
阿尔巴尼亚驻北约使团文电疑遭泄露 2026 年 1 月 22 日，暗网论坛 darkforums.io 出现一则爆料称，阿尔巴尼亚共和国驻希腊大使馆的敏感文件遭黑客泄露。威胁行为者 “HaxChipper” 宣称已获取并公开约 2811 份文件，共 7 个文件夹，总容量约 933MB。 据披露，泄露内容疑似来自邮箱 embassy.athens@mfa.gov.al，包含收件箱、已发送及已删除邮件数据，文件时间主要集中在 2022 年。内容涉及外交人员信息、外交活动记录、国际协议细节及敏感通信等，属于典型政府行政类高敏感数据。 阿尔巴尼亚为北约成员国，该事件被视为高严重等级外交信息泄露事件。相关资料一旦被用于情报分析、社会工程攻击或外交施压，或对其外交安全构成直接威胁。目前阿尔巴尼亚官方尚未对此作出公开回应。攻击者的 Telegram 频道亦同步发布了相关泄露信息。 安全研究人员指出，尽管文件时间较早，但仍具有现实分析价…
❤6👍6
腾讯法务出手：多款微信聊天记录导出工具被迫下架 近日，多款开源、免费的微信聊天记录导出工具在 GitHub 平台遭 DMCA 投诉下架，其中包括曾广受好评的 WeChat Clean 等项目。相关开发者披露，投诉方为腾讯。 从投诉摘要来看，腾讯主要提出四项指控： 一是涉嫌违反 DMCA 第1201条，认为工具“绕过技术保护措施”，因其解析了微信本地数据库结构； 二是违反微信服务条款，构成逆向工程行为； 三是可能威胁用户隐私与数据安全； 四是侵犯腾讯知识产权，投诉文件中甚至称聊天记录存储格式归腾讯所有。 更具争议的是，投诉原文将“让用户访问自己设备中的聊天数据”认定为**“非法的未授权访问”**，该表述在技术圈引发广泛争议。 值得注意的是，GitHub 并未对项目技术细节作出实质裁定，而是依据 DMCA 机制先行下架仓库。对个人开发者而言，跨国维权成本极高，几乎缺乏申诉空间。 不少用户质疑：自己的聊天记录为何不能自行导出…
🤡99🖕32❤11💩9😁4👎3👏1🤣1
疑似 BF 论坛 1200 名 VIP 用户数据库披露，涉 95 个标注为 CN 的 ID 2026 年 1 月 17 日，暗网监测发现一份自称来自 BreachForums（BF 论坛）的 SQL 数据库文件泄露。该数据库宣称涵盖 11 个国家共约 1200 名“VIP 用户”，其中“国家”字段标注为 CN 的用户数量为 95 个。由于泄露者未披露 VIP 用户的评定标准，其身份真实性尚无法确认。 泄露数据包含用户 ID、用户名、明文密码、等级、在线时长、发帖数量、国家字段及最后登录 IP 等 16 项关键信息。统计显示，CN 标注用户中，短时在线与高活跃用户并存，发帖行为呈现明显的“二八分布”，多数账号发帖极少，少数账号贡献大量回复，部分高发帖账号行为特征异常，不排除账号被入侵或被第三方滥用的可能。 IP 归属分析显示，相关用户登录 IP 主要分布在美国、中国、德国等国家，其中美国 IP 占比超过一半，中国本地 IP …
❤20🍾3
新年快乐！
🫡57🎉31👍6❤4🤡4😱2
美国司法部获准远程访问Telegram服务器，引发跨境隐私争议 美国司法部获得法院授权，可远程访问Telegram服务器以获取儿童剥削调查证据。由于Telegram拒绝配合调查，美国当局采取罕见技术手段绕过常规程序，引发全球对隐私与执法边界的热议。 据Court Watch发布的摘要，司法部请求使用“远程访问搜索技术”获取目标账户数据，法院已批准一次性操作。访问过程必须限制在调查员设备内，禁止持续监控和未经授权的进一步操作。 Telegram否认服务器可被访问，强调其端到端加密机制保护用户隐私。尽管平台曾配合提供部分用户元数据，但在严重犯罪调查中，执法部门对其配合度不满。 此次行动标志着美方首次对海外加密平台采取主动干预措施，技术方法类似过去对Tor或暗网的渗透。事件引发关于平台责任、跨境管辖权与用户隐私权的新一轮争论。
😱113❤18🤮15😁12👍6👎6🥰1
加被曝高危漏洞未修复 安全公司怒而公开漏洞细节 安全公司 RAPID7 公开披露一加手机系统中存在 CVE-2025-10184 高危漏洞，攻击者可绕过用户许可读取短信和彩信，威胁严重。一加自5月起被多次联系但始终未回应，RAPID7最终决定公布漏洞细节及部分利用代码，以迫使修复。 该漏洞影响多个 OxygenOS 版本（12至15），源于组件 com.oneplus.provider.telephony 权限控制失当，允许应用在后台访问短信内容并执行 SQL 注入攻击。攻击无需用户操作或提示，用户完全不知情。 RAPID7警告称，黑客可借此窃取验证码、劫持账户，甚至监控用户隐私信息。尽管安全行业通常在厂商修复前不公开漏洞，此次因厂商长时间沉默，被迫打破惯例。 一加目前仍未作出回应，ColorOS 是否受影响也尚不明确。安全专家呼吁用户提高警惕，避免下载来源不明的应用。 有没有一种可能是取证后门？
😁58❤11
历史级泄漏：GFW核心供应商超500GB内部资料曝光，揭示中国审查技术的全球输出 中国“防火长城”（Great Firewall, GFW）经历了自建立以来最严重的内部文件泄漏事件。超过600GB的数据，包括源代码、技术文档、工作日志和内部通信记录，被公开上传至互联网。这些文件来自GFW核心技术供应商——积至（海南）信息技术有限公司和中国科学院信息工程研究所MESA实验室，揭示了中国网络审查与监控体系的核心运作机制与全球输出网络。 泄漏内容概况：深入系统底层的全景曝光 泄漏资料包含关键构件： • 500GB 的 RPM 打包服务器存档 • 技术方案文档与合同 • 源代码存储库与配置文件 • 内部 Jira 工单系统数据 • 中英文项目报告与客户通信记录 泄漏数据的结构揭示了积至公司的旗舰产品体系，如“天狗安全网关（TSG）”、“TSG Galaxy” 数据仓库、“Cyber Narrator” 审查控制台及“N…
😁46❤37💩22🤡15🤯3🤬1🥰1
想了解gfw更深层次的信息和原理的可以仔细阅读 https://gfw.report/blog/geedge_and_mesa_leak/zh/
❤17
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @CN_Privacy. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Citation-graph rank — 881,501 of 1,160,990entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 3 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“隐私中国 Dark Web Inform” (@CN_Privacy), 16,612 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/CN_Privacy.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.