5 ms·

It is highly unlikely that Facebook can read WhatsApp messages. The reason I say that is that Zuckerberg said the couldn't, repeatedly and explicitly, to Congre

It is highly unlikely that Facebook can read WhatsApp messages. The reason I say that is that Zuckerberg said the couldn't, repeatedly and explicitly, to Congress. If there was any chance that they could, he would have either not said anything (the context would have allowed for that) or he would have dissembled. As he did numerous other times on other subjects. As to benefiting from WhatsApp, I'm sure they benefited just fine. They bought it for the contact info from millions of non-Facebook customers that they could use to cross sell. Their growth in, for example, LatAm seems to imply that it worked ok.

ncmncm 7y ago
Does not suggest, in any way, that nobody else can read all WhatsApp traffic, only that explicitly-Facebook employees can't. It would be pre-2013 naive to imagine that, now that WhatsApp traffic is no longer end-to-end encrypted, no use is being made of the change.
- lucozade 7y ago
  > now that WhatsApp traffic is no longer end-to-end encrypted I'm sorry, what?
  - ncmncm 7y ago
    Yes. Use Signal, or Mastodon, or WARP 1.1.1.1 if you trust that.
DrScientist 7y ago
Don't have the transcript - did he say that 'he' couldn't or that Facebook couldn't? Or that other agencies, facilitated by Facebook couldn't?
- lucozade 7y ago
  For example, he said at one point: > No, we don’t see any of the content in WhatsApp, it’s fully encrypted It's clear he's speaking about his company. Given Snowden, it would be monumentally stupid to make such a bare faced lie to Congress if they were reading, or facilitating the ability to read, unencrypted content. Especially as he could have chosen not to say anything so specific. Congressman Schatz was talking about advertising. He could have just said something innocuous like: we don't have the ability to use WhatsApp content for advertising.
  - DrScientist 7y ago
    What he said there was they don't see, not they can't see. What he also didn't say there was whether others routinely saw with Facebooks help. Not saying they do, just saying he didn't strictly say they didn't. He may of also being talking in the context of using content for advertising, not surveillance. Finally a lot of intelligence gathering is just based on who has talked to who kind of networks in the first instance, rather than content because: 1. Content can be obfuscated, but not the connections 2. Easier to store and navigate 3. Less noise
693471 7y ago
If you can read your WhatsApp messages on your phone and you don't control the WhatsApp binary... then Facebook can backdoor WhatsApp to read the decrypted message.
- lucozade 7y ago
  Again, that would mean that he deliberately, explicitly and unnecessarily lied to Congress. That would pretty much require him to be an idiot. He is many things but that's not one of them. I'm not suggesting that no-one can read them. I have no idea. I am saying that his testimony makes me very comfortable that Facebook is not because he has way more to lose from lying than from not in those circumstances.
  - BlueTemplar 7y ago
    Well, maybe that works for you, but I'm more comfortable not trusting anything coming from Facebook...
  - crowtoe76 7y ago
    Your argument here is that you trust Mark Zuckerberg's statement because Mark Zuckerberg wouldn't lie, because if Mark Zuckerberg lied, he would get into lots of trouble, and therefore to avoid getting into lots of trouble, Mark Zuckerberg obviously tells the truth. I have trouble with this logic. Also, I'm not quite clear - what are the consequences for lying to Congress?
rolltiide 7y ago
At any time any analytics package or update can just read whats stored client side and send it to Facebooks servers. Is everyone intentionally ignoring this or actually unaware? Things stored in plain text client side, can be read in plain text client side and resyndicated. All this focus on the first transmission being encrypted while in flight and server side is just a bit negligent. Its a system ripe for abuse and thats it.
nullc 7y ago
> It is highly unlikely that Facebook can read WhatsApp messages. The reason I say that is that Zuckerberg said the couldn't, Not wittingly.

ncmncm 7y ago

Does not suggest, in any way, that nobody else can read all WhatsApp traffic, only that explicitly-Facebook employees can't. It would be pre-2013 naive to imagine that, now that WhatsApp traffic is no longer end-to-end encrypted, no use is being made of the change.

lucozade 7y ago
> now that WhatsApp traffic is no longer end-to-end encrypted I'm sorry, what?
- ncmncm 7y ago
  Yes. Use Signal, or Mastodon, or WARP 1.1.1.1 if you trust that.

DrScientist 7y ago

Don't have the transcript - did he say that 'he' couldn't or that Facebook couldn't? Or that other agencies, facilitated by Facebook couldn't?

lucozade 7y ago
For example, he said at one point: > No, we don’t see any of the content in WhatsApp, it’s fully encrypted It's clear he's speaking about his company. Given Snowden, it would be monumentally stupid to make such a bare faced lie to Congress if they were reading, or facilitating the ability to read, unencrypted content. Especially as he could have chosen not to say anything so specific. Congressman Schatz was talking about advertising. He could have just said something innocuous like: we don't have the ability to use WhatsApp content for advertising.
- DrScientist 7y ago
  What he said there was they don't see, not they can't see. What he also didn't say there was whether others routinely saw with Facebooks help. Not saying they do, just saying he didn't strictly say they didn't. He may of also being talking in the context of using content for advertising, not surveillance. Finally a lot of intelligence gathering is just based on who has talked to who kind of networks in the first instance, rather than content because: 1. Content can be obfuscated, but not the connections 2. Easier to store and navigate 3. Less noise

693471 7y ago

If you can read your WhatsApp messages on your phone and you don't control the WhatsApp binary... then Facebook can backdoor WhatsApp to read the decrypted message.

lucozade 7y ago
Again, that would mean that he deliberately, explicitly and unnecessarily lied to Congress. That would pretty much require him to be an idiot. He is many things but that's not one of them. I'm not suggesting that no-one can read them. I have no idea. I am saying that his testimony makes me very comfortable that Facebook is not because he has way more to lose from lying than from not in those circumstances.
- BlueTemplar 7y ago
  Well, maybe that works for you, but I'm more comfortable not trusting anything coming from Facebook...
- crowtoe76 7y ago
  Your argument here is that you trust Mark Zuckerberg's statement because Mark Zuckerberg wouldn't lie, because if Mark Zuckerberg lied, he would get into lots of trouble, and therefore to avoid getting into lots of trouble, Mark Zuckerberg obviously tells the truth. I have trouble with this logic. Also, I'm not quite clear - what are the consequences for lying to Congress?

rolltiide 7y ago

At any time any analytics package or update can just read whats stored client side and send it to Facebooks servers. Is everyone intentionally ignoring this or actually unaware? Things stored in plain text client side, can be read in plain text client side and resyndicated. All this focus on the first transmission being encrypted while in flight and server side is just a bit negligent. Its a system ripe for abuse and thats it.

nullc 7y ago

> It is highly unlikely that Facebook can read WhatsApp messages. The reason I say that is that Zuckerberg said the couldn't, Not wittingly.