4 ms·

If they don't do E2E, users will abandon Facebook for platforms that do support it (and already are). And they aren't doing this to commit crimes, but to preven

If they don't do E2E, users will abandon Facebook for platforms that do support it (and already are). And they aren't doing this to commit crimes, but to prevent advertisements from targeting every conversation they've ever had.

dancemethis1 7y ago
They won't. People are not really giving a crap for their (and their peers') safety. Just look at how popular Discord is alongside FB.
dylan604 7y ago
Please name these other platforms
- tempestn 7y ago
  Signal messenger
- sschueller 7y ago
  Telegram, threema, wire swiss, matrix, signal and many more.
kitchenkarma 7y ago
You are unable to tell whether any service uses E2E. It is best to assume we don't have E2E services and adjust own opsec accordingly.
saagarjha 7y ago
I wonder how many WhatsApp users are aware that their messages are encrypted end-to-end.
- pilsetnieks 7y ago
  It shows that in every message thread, so I'd say everyone; how many understand that and realize the consequences of having or not having E2E encryption is another matter.
- hathawsh 7y ago
  I also wonder how many users are aware of the imperfections in the end to end encryption in WhatsApp. https://keybase.io/blog/chat-apps-softer-than-tofu https://keybase.io/blog/chat-apps-softer-than-tofu (I have no affiliation with Keybase, I just appreciate their very thorough and public analysis.)
  - myu701 7y ago
    Thanks for posting this! I used the wayback machine to read the older version of this article, it took specific aim at WhatsApp and Sigal, indicating that (in so many words) it disapproved of the apps providing a notice of Safety Numbers changing instead of the app flipping its wig and making the user take affirmative action to continue communications, otherwise it wasn't true TOFU. I have about 30+ contacts on Signal, and I almost __never__ get Safety number changes. I certainly don't think making the user click through yet-another-dialog-they-wont-read will be a big security improvement. I suppose I disagree with the 'not true TOFU' argument.
tudelo 7y ago
I think if more people understood that it could reduce creepy ad targeting they would be more ready to move.
cameronbrown 7y ago
Honest question: We all know FB won't give up their targeting data, but if it's done locally on-device and we have access to see & modify it, would you support it as a better business model?
- tomc1985 7y ago
  Framing it in terms of business models and inevitability dodges the question of whether they should be doing it in the first place.
  - bduerst 7y ago
    You mean, should free advertising-subsidized services even exist?
    - thenewnewguy 7y ago
      Mining and storing user data is in no way a requirement to run ads.
      - bduerst 7y ago
        So using data for optimization should be banned?
        thenewnewguy 7y ago
        Obvious false equivalence. Just because we protect collecting/using certain data in certain contexts where we believe it does more harm than good doesn't mean we have to ban all data collection/use.
        bduerst 7y ago
        You specifically stipulated that the data optimization was bad - then why is data optimization of ads harmful? Doesn't serving relevant ads have more utility?
sl1ck731 7y ago
I doubt the large majority of users of Facebook services can even pick out advertisements from content, let alone care about E2E encryption. I don't think they will be hurt by the fraction that do leave for this reason.
vlan0 7y ago
>users will abandon Facebook for platforms that do support it Assuming someone already has knowledge of Facebook's past activities, then they are likely already gone. If they are still using the service, it's unlikely this will make a difference. Cheap and convenient is just too much of a draw for some folks. Especially when it involves "staying connected" with friends and family (irrational behavior driven by emotion).
buboard 7y ago
People are so much on board with govt surveillance, and so indifferent to privacy technology that it is now the duty of tech to teach people the tools they should use. If , of course, tech is on the side of true privacy
stjohnswarts 7y ago
No they won't drop Facebook. They will keep using facebook as long as it's useful to them or the next big thing comes along. 90% of people don't care if the government spies on everything they do.

dancemethis1 7y ago

They won't. People are not really giving a crap for their (and their peers') safety. Just look at how popular Discord is alongside FB.

dylan604 7y ago

Please name these other platforms

tempestn 7y ago
Signal messenger
sschueller 7y ago
Telegram, threema, wire swiss, matrix, signal and many more.

kitchenkarma 7y ago

You are unable to tell whether any service uses E2E. It is best to assume we don't have E2E services and adjust own opsec accordingly.

saagarjha 7y ago

I wonder how many WhatsApp users are aware that their messages are encrypted end-to-end.

pilsetnieks 7y ago
It shows that in every message thread, so I'd say everyone; how many understand that and realize the consequences of having or not having E2E encryption is another matter.
hathawsh 7y ago
I also wonder how many users are aware of the imperfections in the end to end encryption in WhatsApp. https://keybase.io/blog/chat-apps-softer-than-tofu https://keybase.io/blog/chat-apps-softer-than-tofu (I have no affiliation with Keybase, I just appreciate their very thorough and public analysis.)
- myu701 7y ago
  Thanks for posting this! I used the wayback machine to read the older version of this article, it took specific aim at WhatsApp and Sigal, indicating that (in so many words) it disapproved of the apps providing a notice of Safety Numbers changing instead of the app flipping its wig and making the user take affirmative action to continue communications, otherwise it wasn't true TOFU. I have about 30+ contacts on Signal, and I almost __never__ get Safety number changes. I certainly don't think making the user click through yet-another-dialog-they-wont-read will be a big security improvement. I suppose I disagree with the 'not true TOFU' argument.

tudelo 7y ago

I think if more people understood that it could reduce creepy ad targeting they would be more ready to move.

cameronbrown 7y ago

Honest question: We all know FB won't give up their targeting data, but if it's done locally on-device and we have access to see & modify it, would you support it as a better business model?

tomc1985 7y ago
Framing it in terms of business models and inevitability dodges the question of whether they should be doing it in the first place.
- bduerst 7y ago
  You mean, should free advertising-subsidized services even exist?
  - thenewnewguy 7y ago
    Mining and storing user data is in no way a requirement to run ads.
    - bduerst 7y ago
      So using data for optimization should be banned?
      - thenewnewguy 7y ago
        Obvious false equivalence. Just because we protect collecting/using certain data in certain contexts where we believe it does more harm than good doesn't mean we have to ban all data collection/use.
        bduerst 7y ago
        You specifically stipulated that the data optimization was bad - then why is data optimization of ads harmful? Doesn't serving relevant ads have more utility?

sl1ck731 7y ago

I doubt the large majority of users of Facebook services can even pick out advertisements from content, let alone care about E2E encryption. I don't think they will be hurt by the fraction that do leave for this reason.

vlan0 7y ago

>users will abandon Facebook for platforms that do support it Assuming someone already has knowledge of Facebook's past activities, then they are likely already gone. If they are still using the service, it's unlikely this will make a difference. Cheap and convenient is just too much of a draw for some folks. Especially when it involves "staying connected" with friends and family (irrational behavior driven by emotion).

buboard 7y ago

People are so much on board with govt surveillance, and so indifferent to privacy technology that it is now the duty of tech to teach people the tools they should use. If , of course, tech is on the side of true privacy

stjohnswarts 7y ago

No they won't drop Facebook. They will keep using facebook as long as it's useful to them or the next big thing comes along. 90% of people don't care if the government spies on everything they do.