Around a year ago WhatsApp had large ads that just said “no one else can read your messages.” I don’t think most people thought that some one could, which makes me wonder why they were paying so much to say it.
Comment on Lawsuit Alleges That WhatsApp Has No End-to-End Encryption
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I never used WhatsApp, but what made people think they used e2e? I’m way passed blindly believing what any company says they do without proof. I’d expect some kind of key or certificate management in the app, is that present?
purplemonkeymad@programming.dev 23 hours ago
foo@feddit.uk 20 hours ago
Any time they get asked questions like “Are my messages visible only to me?”, they answer with a very canned response like “Your messages are encrypted from end-to-end and can’t be read by anyone while in transit” … or words to that effect. I have never seen them state that no analytics or telemetry is happening on the unencrypted side by the client. Which has always bothered me.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 14 hours ago
Because after N scandals, they needed to make sure people would trust them. Meta had never considered itself bound to any promise or commitment they ever made to anyone (users, ads customers, etc.). But you want a monopole, you need to make sure people see no issue with using your services.
And they’re doing it again with Threads. And it works AGAIN, because they promised not to do anything evil. Pending the next inevitable scandal with users flabbergasted that Meta could have done it AGAIN.
JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Is anyone actually still using threads? I thought all the Twitter refugees ended up on Bluesky.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 10 hours ago
If I trust the numbers I found, Threads has 200M users, vs 2.5–3M for all of Mastodon’s instances but-Threads.
Down the same road, again.
foo@feddit.uk 20 hours ago
Back at the start WhatsApp wasn’t free, although it was pretty cheap. Then Meta bought it and made it free. Some time after that, the founders left and started Signal.
The E2E encrypted protocol WhatsApp used to use was the Signal protocol. When the OG founders left and created Signal they revamped it, calling it the Signal V2 protocol. Whether WhatsApp still uses that original Signal protocol or not is probably not known to many people outside of Meta, but WhatsApp definitely used to be E2E encrypted prior to Meta’s purchase.
I deleted my WhatsApp account around the time Meta announced they were merging all of their messaging stuff together, e.g. Facebook Messenger, Instagram etc.
Ozymandias88@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
People expect it what WhatsApp claims it’s E2E encrypted at the start of each chat:
Screenshot from the start of a WhatsApp thread where WhatsApp prints “Messages and calls are end-to-end encrypted. Only people in this chat can read, listen to, or share them.”
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 12 hours ago
And also because at some point they hired Signal people to design E2EE for them, I think.
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 8 hours ago
I don’t think they hired them, they just use the open source code library that the signal app also uses.
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
I mean yeah, I get that… but why would I believe that? Its trivial to add a label in an app and make it say that. I’m questioning trust here. My question should have rather been: why do people **trust **Meta will do exactly what they say? Its Meta, that immediately sends alarms to my brain saying to stay cautious.
ytg@sopuli.xyz 16 hours ago
No inherent reason to believe that, but seems like lying about this should be illegal. The belief is in Meta’s compliance with the law rather than in its ethics, which, according to these claims, is unfortunately an unfounded belief.
architect@thelemmy.club 14 hours ago
Why would the law matter? We clearly saw him bribe the president. It was public and in our faces.