5 ms·

> WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when - backups are not encry

> WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when - backups are not encrypted by default so plaintext of your private chats can be obtained - even if you enable encryption for backups all it takes is for the other person in your private convo (or a person in a group chat) to not enable it for your messages to be available in plaintext

addandsubtract 8d ago
WhatsApp / Meta is also on both sides of the E2EE.
- lxgr 8d ago
  Sure, but so is every security researcher in the world if they want to be, and they only need to get caught shipping exfiltration logic once.
  - bossyTeacher 8d ago
    > so is every security researcher in the world if they want to be Most security researchers lack Meta's history: - Testing emotional manipulation features on thousands of users non-consensually - Adding spyware on underage users - Intercept a rival app's traffic - Allowing harm to teen mental health And most importantly, most security researchers lack the money and power to fend off the legal consequences of these acts.
    - lxgr 8d ago
      > Most security researchers lack Meta's history: [...] Why would you assume that security researchers don't know about these? If anything, wouldn't all the bad press and scandals make WhatsApp a more likely target of scrutiny? > And most importantly, most security researchers lack the money and power to fend off the legal consequences of these acts. Yes, security research is generally expensive, but do you have any evidence for Meta taking legal steps against it and making it actively harder? I remember e.g. the controversy around WhatsApp re-encrypting unconfirmed outbound messages to a new key; this was revealed by security researchers and widely discussed. (Not that they're making it easier by providing source code for WhatsApp's cryptography or a debug interface to validate what's actually going on in the client, but neither does e.g. iMessage.) In fact, there's a relatively absurd lawsuit against Meta on WhatsApp encryption going on right now, and these claims are widely being repeated all over social media.
      - bossyTeacher 7d ago
        I meant to say that most researchers have engaged in the unethical actions that Meta has. It's not that Meta is making it harder to report them but the fact that reporting them does not meaningfully disincentivise Meta from carrying on with their unethical behaviour (i.e. it is not an effective deterrent).
        lxgr 7d ago
        Being unethical is, for better or worse, not automatically illegal. Saying that your product provides end-to-end encryption and you can't access message content and then intentionally shipping a backdoor (for your own benefit and not, say, that of a government that compels you to do this) would very likely be.
lxgr 8d ago
> - backups are not encrypted by default so plaintext of your private chats can be obtained Yes, but importantly not by Meta themselves. > - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when Fair enough and worth mentioning. I'm personally fine with it. > - even if you enable encryption for backups all it takes is for the other person in your private convo (or a person in a group chat) to not enable it for your messages to be available in plaintext Yes, but how would you prevent that even in principle? I can't control what the people I'm messaging do with their copy of my messages. As long as there isn't unnecessary non-repudiation (e.g. by the sender cryptographically signing all outbound messages, which the Signal protocol intentionally avoids), I think this is fair as well. I do agree that e.g. vanishing chats with a short timeout/"view only once" images should probably not be included in backups, though; last time I checked, I think they were.
- cobbzilla 8d ago
  > Yes, but importantly not by Meta themselves. Don’t they save backups to Meta? Even if not, they can read whatever’s (unencrypted) on your phone if they really want to.
  - lxgr 8d ago
    They currently go on iCloud on iOS and Google Drive on Android. There are rumors about a first-party backup service, which would obviously change that calculus, but nothing concrete yet.
netsharc 8d ago
I've read that if you give FB/IG/WA access to all files/photos, and you have GPS metadata for photos (I do, hey it's useful to know where I took a pic), it can trawl that data to see where you've been and when... So now Android strips location info when sharing an image to an app. A filter layer between filesystem and app, to add complexity to the whole system...

addandsubtract 8d ago

WhatsApp / Meta is also on both sides of the E2EE.

lxgr 8d ago
Sure, but so is every security researcher in the world if they want to be, and they only need to get caught shipping exfiltration logic once.
- bossyTeacher 8d ago
  > so is every security researcher in the world if they want to be Most security researchers lack Meta's history: - Testing emotional manipulation features on thousands of users non-consensually - Adding spyware on underage users - Intercept a rival app's traffic - Allowing harm to teen mental health And most importantly, most security researchers lack the money and power to fend off the legal consequences of these acts.
  - lxgr 8d ago
    > Most security researchers lack Meta's history: [...] Why would you assume that security researchers don't know about these? If anything, wouldn't all the bad press and scandals make WhatsApp a more likely target of scrutiny? > And most importantly, most security researchers lack the money and power to fend off the legal consequences of these acts. Yes, security research is generally expensive, but do you have any evidence for Meta taking legal steps against it and making it actively harder? I remember e.g. the controversy around WhatsApp re-encrypting unconfirmed outbound messages to a new key; this was revealed by security researchers and widely discussed. (Not that they're making it easier by providing source code for WhatsApp's cryptography or a debug interface to validate what's actually going on in the client, but neither does e.g. iMessage.) In fact, there's a relatively absurd lawsuit against Meta on WhatsApp encryption going on right now, and these claims are widely being repeated all over social media.
    - bossyTeacher 7d ago
      I meant to say that most researchers have engaged in the unethical actions that Meta has. It's not that Meta is making it harder to report them but the fact that reporting them does not meaningfully disincentivise Meta from carrying on with their unethical behaviour (i.e. it is not an effective deterrent).
      - lxgr 7d ago
        Being unethical is, for better or worse, not automatically illegal. Saying that your product provides end-to-end encryption and you can't access message content and then intentionally shipping a backdoor (for your own benefit and not, say, that of a government that compels you to do this) would very likely be.

lxgr 8d ago

> - backups are not encrypted by default so plaintext of your private chats can be obtained Yes, but importantly not by Meta themselves. > - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when Fair enough and worth mentioning. I'm personally fine with it. > - even if you enable encryption for backups all it takes is for the other person in your private convo (or a person in a group chat) to not enable it for your messages to be available in plaintext Yes, but how would you prevent that even in principle? I can't control what the people I'm messaging do with their copy of my messages. As long as there isn't unnecessary non-repudiation (e.g. by the sender cryptographically signing all outbound messages, which the Signal protocol intentionally avoids), I think this is fair as well. I do agree that e.g. vanishing chats with a short timeout/"view only once" images should probably not be included in backups, though; last time I checked, I think they were.

cobbzilla 8d ago
> Yes, but importantly not by Meta themselves. Don’t they save backups to Meta? Even if not, they can read whatever’s (unencrypted) on your phone if they really want to.
- lxgr 8d ago
  They currently go on iCloud on iOS and Google Drive on Android. There are rumors about a first-party backup service, which would obviously change that calculus, but nothing concrete yet.

netsharc 8d ago

I've read that if you give FB/IG/WA access to all files/photos, and you have GPS metadata for photos (I do, hey it's useful to know where I took a pic), it can trawl that data to see where you've been and when... So now Android strips location info when sharing an image to an app. A filter layer between filesystem and app, to add complexity to the whole system...