4 ms·
> I doubt end-to-end encryption blocks that. Isn't it supposed to?
by rascul 3y ago
> I doubt end-to-end encryption blocks that.
Isn't it supposed to?
- ben_w 3y agoA keyword search is simple enough it can be done client side, before any encryption (and/or after decryption).
- rascul 3y agoOh, good point.
- stonepresto 3y agoWhat's to stop them from having hooks in their app that can bundle up all the decrypted messages, re-encrypt, and phone home? Certainly it wouldn't be default behavior, but its possible and would allow them to answer warrants.
- beej71 3y agoIt's a good point. But someone would eventually see it in the dev tools and Meta's credibility would be shot forever. It's an open question if that impacts their bottom line at all.
- stonepresto 3y agoAgreed. I think their bottom line probably is built off of how it would affect their user base. My hunch is given the immensity of the user base, it wouldn't cause enough of a significant exodus for Meta to care either way. But that's speculation, not sure if that can be backed up with evidence from past events.
- constGard 3y agoI never saw this substantiated, but I heard that they had on-device systems that they used in emergencies for stuff that was particularly bad + easy to scan for. The time I heard of it being deployed was to prevent the spread of the Christchurch shooting video.
- rich_sasha 3y agoWhatsApp wording is usually very specific about e2e when you send a message from you to your contact. Nothing about eg all this also being dumped on FB servers in plaintext. This wouldn't be an outright lie - it may well be e2ee but just also shared around.
- acdha 3y agoThat would be a lie from the perspective of a court since it very clearly does not fit their description of the service. In cases like that, courts tend to give leeway to the argument that they promised what a reasonable person would conclude from the product advertisement. What would be more interesting would be if they had a way to signal their app to do a search locally and report a match. That would still be E2E but might be enough that they would be able to defend a lawsuit.
- rich_sasha 3y ago> That would be a lie from the perspective of a court since it very clearly does not fit their description of the service. I don't know. They promise a particular aspect of privacy and presumably deliver on it. They don't promise absolute privacy - that's my whole point. I think given the exact wording of what they promise, I can't reasonably expect that my conversations are private only between me and the recipient.
- acdha 3y agoThis is what they said and it very clearly excludes the scenario in question: > The extra layer of security provided by end-to-end encryption means that the content of your messages and calls with friends and family are protected from the moment they leave your device to the moment they reach the receiver’s device. This means that nobody, including Meta, can see what’s sent or said, unless you choose to report a message to us.
- rich_sasha 3y agoWith what little FANG legalese I know, this IMHO covers Al ranges of nasty behaviour. But of course we won't know either way until it's tried in court.