4 ms·

> Metadata is incredible valuable and sometimes just as valuable as the decrypted data itself. Just adding an example for the people who don't see the value o

> Metadata is incredible valuable and sometimes just as valuable as the decrypted data itself. Just adding an example for the people who don't see the value of metadata: WhatsApp is still a viable revenue source for Facebook even as they have no access to the text of the messages due to E2EE. Knowing who talks to who, at what times, the type and approximate size of messages, the members of groups, and the contents of the phone book of every user gives enough information to keep their business model without exposing them to court orders asking for the plaintext (that's the reason they added E2EE to start with, there is no incentive to improve the service when they have a billion heads of cattle to milk).

Threeve303 6y ago
Every so often I like to go back and read Using Metadata to find Paul Revere [0]. [0] https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metadata-to-find-paul-revere/ https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metad...
just-ok 6y ago
> they have no access to the text of the messages due to E2EE. Correction: they might not have access to the message text. It's entirely possible (if not plausible: FB doesn't exactly have a good track record) for FB to just self-MitM the E2EE and see everything that passes through their servers. From their site: > The verification process is optional for end-to-end encrypted chats, and only used to confirm that the messages and calls you send are end-to-end encrypted. Even this process--which I'm sure very few people do--is fallible given the lack of authenticity: there's no way to confirm that the given keys are what's actually used for encryption. Yes, this may come across as very "tinfoil-hat-y," but do you really trust FB to not be exploring every possible avenue to increase their data streams?
- samsonradu 6y ago
  > It's entirely possible (if not plausible: FB doesn't exactly have a good track record) for FB to just self-MitM the E2EE and see everything that passes through their servers. Why would they even need to MitM in transit when they control the endpoints? They can just analyze the raw text locally (in the app) and extract valuable information.
  - just-ok 6y ago
    Excellent point, way less tinfoil-y.
eitland 6y ago
> WhatsApp is still a viable revenue source for Facebook even as they have no access to the text of the messages due to E2EE. A friendly reminder to everyone that even if the encryption that is used to send the messages in WhatsApp seems to be solid they upload your entire chat history as unencrypted dumps to the cloud. Even if you turn it off your chats will still end up there as long as whoever you are chatting with doesn't also disable this.
- thecopy 6y ago
  This is the first time i hear about WhatsApp storing unecrypted copies of my chats in their cloud. Can you provide more information?
  - gaius_baltar 6y ago
    I suppose the AFAIK (I do not use WhatsApp), it's Google backup services on Android. WhatsApp stores the local chat history unencrypted in the device and does not mark it as "do not backup", so the cloud sync service uploads it to the backup service. And Android does not encrypt this information. For contrast, Signal does encrypt the local history and the backups (to the point that is a bit harder to backup the chat to outside in Android, you need to copy a randomly generate password manually to restore it. But it's a safe approach).
    - danhor 6y ago
      Additionally, WhatsApp heavily encourages storing backups in Google Drive as well, with semi-regular popups asking users to configure backups in GDrive and to set the backup interval, if not already done. Obviously this doesn't mean Facebook has the information and the straightforward interpretation is that it's the least involved way of creating backups without sending it all to facebook
      - eitland 6y ago
        Agree. My point is mostly aimed at people claiming WhatsApp is somehow very safe just because of the end-to-end encryption. I'm saying end-to-end encryption is a really great idea and everyone should do that and still encouraging people to look beyond that and think about the entire threat model when deciding what is important for them.
goatinaboat 6y ago
Knowing who talks to who, at what times, the type and approximate size of messages, the members of groups, and the contents of the phone book of every user gives enough information to keep their business model without exposing them to court orders asking for the plaintext Similarly Google runs 8.8.8.8 so they know what services you use that aren’t HTTP that they don’t have bugged already.
dancemethis 6y ago
There is no proof they didn't tamper with their OpenWhisper implementation - Whatsapp is proprietary software on client and server. And looking at what has unfolded in the last decade, chances are against the user and we must, for ours and our peers' safety, assume the worst.

Threeve303 6y ago

Every so often I like to go back and read Using Metadata to find Paul Revere [0]. [0] https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metadata-to-find-paul-revere/ https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metad...

just-ok 6y ago

> they have no access to the text of the messages due to E2EE. Correction: they might not have access to the message text. It's entirely possible (if not plausible: FB doesn't exactly have a good track record) for FB to just self-MitM the E2EE and see everything that passes through their servers. From their site: > The verification process is optional for end-to-end encrypted chats, and only used to confirm that the messages and calls you send are end-to-end encrypted. Even this process--which I'm sure very few people do--is fallible given the lack of authenticity: there's no way to confirm that the given keys are what's actually used for encryption. Yes, this may come across as very "tinfoil-hat-y," but do you really trust FB to not be exploring every possible avenue to increase their data streams?

samsonradu 6y ago
> It's entirely possible (if not plausible: FB doesn't exactly have a good track record) for FB to just self-MitM the E2EE and see everything that passes through their servers. Why would they even need to MitM in transit when they control the endpoints? They can just analyze the raw text locally (in the app) and extract valuable information.
- just-ok 6y ago
  Excellent point, way less tinfoil-y.

eitland 6y ago

> WhatsApp is still a viable revenue source for Facebook even as they have no access to the text of the messages due to E2EE. A friendly reminder to everyone that even if the encryption that is used to send the messages in WhatsApp seems to be solid they upload your entire chat history as unencrypted dumps to the cloud. Even if you turn it off your chats will still end up there as long as whoever you are chatting with doesn't also disable this.

thecopy 6y ago
This is the first time i hear about WhatsApp storing unecrypted copies of my chats in their cloud. Can you provide more information?
- gaius_baltar 6y ago
  I suppose the AFAIK (I do not use WhatsApp), it's Google backup services on Android. WhatsApp stores the local chat history unencrypted in the device and does not mark it as "do not backup", so the cloud sync service uploads it to the backup service. And Android does not encrypt this information. For contrast, Signal does encrypt the local history and the backups (to the point that is a bit harder to backup the chat to outside in Android, you need to copy a randomly generate password manually to restore it. But it's a safe approach).
  - danhor 6y ago
    Additionally, WhatsApp heavily encourages storing backups in Google Drive as well, with semi-regular popups asking users to configure backups in GDrive and to set the backup interval, if not already done. Obviously this doesn't mean Facebook has the information and the straightforward interpretation is that it's the least involved way of creating backups without sending it all to facebook
    - eitland 6y ago
      Agree. My point is mostly aimed at people claiming WhatsApp is somehow very safe just because of the end-to-end encryption. I'm saying end-to-end encryption is a really great idea and everyone should do that and still encouraging people to look beyond that and think about the entire threat model when deciding what is important for them.

goatinaboat 6y ago

Knowing who talks to who, at what times, the type and approximate size of messages, the members of groups, and the contents of the phone book of every user gives enough information to keep their business model without exposing them to court orders asking for the plaintext Similarly Google runs 8.8.8.8 so they know what services you use that aren’t HTTP that they don’t have bugged already.

dancemethis 6y ago

There is no proof they didn't tamper with their OpenWhisper implementation - Whatsapp is proprietary software on client and server. And looking at what has unfolded in the last decade, chances are against the user and we must, for ours and our peers' safety, assume the worst.