3 ms·

As I say, I don't use WhatsApp, so I don't know. However, quoting from another report on this: > If you want to comb through Google Search to find out if your

As I say, I don't use WhatsApp, so I don't know. However, quoting from another report on this: > If you want to comb through Google Search to find out if your private WhatsApp group is indexed, just start with a “chat.whatsapp.com” string and then enter in some information specific to your chat. Vice did this and was able to find several chat groups related to sharing porn as well as a chat that describes itself as being for NGOs accredited by the United Nations. These chat groups listed out members’ names as well as contact information, in some cases phone numbers. -- https://www.androidauthority.com/private-whatsapp-1085998/ https://www.androidauthority.com/private-whatsapp-1085998/ So I don't know who's sharing these links, or what the mechanism is for doing so, but I'm pretty sure people won't be expecting the groups to be found via a Google search. As such, whatever the mechanism may be, dismissing this as "Works as intended" seems to me to be breathtaking arrogance. Your opinion may differ, but I think muggles would be surprised by this, and potentially it's only being kept in the dark about it that's stopping them from being very angry.

Tomte 7y ago
> dismissing this as "Works as intended" seems to me to be breathtaking arrogance. I really don't like your arrogant dismissal. I've tried to understand the issue, after three articles it's still unclear. But let's step back for a second. How would you expect it to work? How could anyone else be at fault than the one posting the link on public web sites (and it doesn't look like it's WhatsApp). Say, I'm posting a link to your LinkedIn profile here on Hacker News. How do you propose that LinkedIn(!) stops following other people that link to your profile? Assuming you didn't want to have that posted, wouldn't you take umbrage with me? What mechanism do you expect WhatsApp to implement to make sure that (a) a link can be followed by the right people, after sharing it publically and (b) the link cannot be followed by the wrong people and (c) the link is enough to enter the group, so no password, because that#s the whole point of that feature – and a password would be shared just alongside the link anyway.
- ColinWright 7y ago
  Let me put it this way. People tout WhatsApp as being secure, and yet when it's working allegedly as intended, people who have not been invited to join a group chat can nevertheless so so. Genuinely, do you not find that surprising? You ask: > How would you expect it to work? I would expect it to work over secure channels, and not over links that can be discovered and indexed by Google. Look, I don't have knowledge to debate this. I've mentioned it to several non-technical people I know who use WhatsApp and they genuinely are surprised. They thought it would be secure, they thought that creating private chat groups would be, you know, private. As I've said repeatedly, I don't know how it works, I don't know where the muggles' expectations are deviating from those of the technically literate, but I do know that people are finding it surprising that their allegedly private groups chats are not, in fact, private. Clearly your expectations are different. But I'll stop now, since I'm failing so spectacularly to explain my concerns.
  - Tomte 7y ago
    > I would expect it to work over secure channels, and not over links that can be discovered and indexed by Google. How on earth? The web and links are pretty much the only thing we have to point people towards internet services. And I just checked, in the app, directly under the link, there is the following sentence: "Every WhatsApp user can follow this link to enter the group. Share it only with people you trust" (my translation, English wording probably differs). > Look, I don't have time to debate this. So instead of finding out what's happening (it's still not clear!), you'd rather use your time to FUD your friends and acquaintances. > I've mentioned it to several non-technical people I know who use WhatsApp and they are surprised. Of course, if you coloured it with your opinion and speculation, like you did in this thread.
    - ColinWright 7y ago
      >> I've mentioned it to several non-technical people I know who use WhatsApp and they are surprised. > Of course, if you coloured it with your opinion and speculation, like you did in this thread. So it's spreading FUD to tell them the exact thing that's there in the app? Pointing out that links to group chats have been found on Google searches is spreading FUD? Pretty sure we must be starting from different premises, and that it's unlikely this will go anywhere. You've made it clear that you think it's reasonable for it to work the way it days, I've tried to make it clear that people are surprised that links to group chats are being found via web searches. I've also tried to make it clear that I think their level of surprise is reasonable. Not sure there's much more to say.
- ColinWright 7y ago
  Addressing this separately, I said: > dismissing this as "Works as intended" seems to me to be breathtaking arrogance. You said: > I really don't like your arrogant dismissal. I've tried to understand the issue, after three articles it's still unclear. So let me put it this way: * Users are surprised that this happens, and some of them are concerned, * The software people are saying: It works as intended, so I don't see the problem. To me, that response is arrogant, in effect saying: Well you're just to stupid to understand how it works. Maybe my expectations are just radically different from yours, maybe we're just talking past each other, maybe I just can't express myself clearly enough for you to see my point, or maybe I'm just wrong.

Tomte 7y ago

> dismissing this as "Works as intended" seems to me to be breathtaking arrogance. I really don't like your arrogant dismissal. I've tried to understand the issue, after three articles it's still unclear. But let's step back for a second. How would you expect it to work? How could anyone else be at fault than the one posting the link on public web sites (and it doesn't look like it's WhatsApp). Say, I'm posting a link to your LinkedIn profile here on Hacker News. How do you propose that LinkedIn(!) stops following other people that link to your profile? Assuming you didn't want to have that posted, wouldn't you take umbrage with me? What mechanism do you expect WhatsApp to implement to make sure that (a) a link can be followed by the right people, after sharing it publically and (b) the link cannot be followed by the wrong people and (c) the link is enough to enter the group, so no password, because that#s the whole point of that feature – and a password would be shared just alongside the link anyway.

ColinWright 7y ago
Let me put it this way. People tout WhatsApp as being secure, and yet when it's working allegedly as intended, people who have not been invited to join a group chat can nevertheless so so. Genuinely, do you not find that surprising? You ask: > How would you expect it to work? I would expect it to work over secure channels, and not over links that can be discovered and indexed by Google. Look, I don't have knowledge to debate this. I've mentioned it to several non-technical people I know who use WhatsApp and they genuinely are surprised. They thought it would be secure, they thought that creating private chat groups would be, you know, private. As I've said repeatedly, I don't know how it works, I don't know where the muggles' expectations are deviating from those of the technically literate, but I do know that people are finding it surprising that their allegedly private groups chats are not, in fact, private. Clearly your expectations are different. But I'll stop now, since I'm failing so spectacularly to explain my concerns.
- Tomte 7y ago
  > I would expect it to work over secure channels, and not over links that can be discovered and indexed by Google. How on earth? The web and links are pretty much the only thing we have to point people towards internet services. And I just checked, in the app, directly under the link, there is the following sentence: "Every WhatsApp user can follow this link to enter the group. Share it only with people you trust" (my translation, English wording probably differs). > Look, I don't have time to debate this. So instead of finding out what's happening (it's still not clear!), you'd rather use your time to FUD your friends and acquaintances. > I've mentioned it to several non-technical people I know who use WhatsApp and they are surprised. Of course, if you coloured it with your opinion and speculation, like you did in this thread.
  - ColinWright 7y ago
    >> I've mentioned it to several non-technical people I know who use WhatsApp and they are surprised. > Of course, if you coloured it with your opinion and speculation, like you did in this thread. So it's spreading FUD to tell them the exact thing that's there in the app? Pointing out that links to group chats have been found on Google searches is spreading FUD? Pretty sure we must be starting from different premises, and that it's unlikely this will go anywhere. You've made it clear that you think it's reasonable for it to work the way it days, I've tried to make it clear that people are surprised that links to group chats are being found via web searches. I've also tried to make it clear that I think their level of surprise is reasonable. Not sure there's much more to say.
ColinWright 7y ago
Addressing this separately, I said: > dismissing this as "Works as intended" seems to me to be breathtaking arrogance. You said: > I really don't like your arrogant dismissal. I've tried to understand the issue, after three articles it's still unclear. So let me put it this way: * Users are surprised that this happens, and some of them are concerned, * The software people are saying: It works as intended, so I don't see the problem. To me, that response is arrogant, in effect saying: Well you're just to stupid to understand how it works. Maybe my expectations are just radically different from yours, maybe we're just talking past each other, maybe I just can't express myself clearly enough for you to see my point, or maybe I'm just wrong.