3 ms·

Facebook is on both ends of the e2e. e2e encryption means no from client to client can read your messages. Your client certainly can - and Facebook is the cli

Facebook is on both ends of the e2e. e2e encryption means no from client to client can read your messages. Your client certainly can - and Facebook is the client. It would have no problem sending back signals on your messages (or the full message) to Facebook servers. Doesn't mean it's happening. But it's interesting that e2e encryption alone makes you positive it isn't.

zer0zzz 3y ago
Agreed, and that’s how it would work. I was more highlighting the throwaway with comment that had no context or link to sources.
- throwaway2990 3y ago
  There’s been many stories over the years of people being advertised to from things mentioned in what’s meant to be a private conversation.
  - zer0zzz 3y ago
    “People are saying…”
    - throwaway2990 3y ago
      “People say trust Facebook because they control the e2e and I can’t imagine an attack vector”
      - zer0zzz 3y ago
        So much for those “many stories”
        throwaway2990 3y ago
        lol I’m not going to try convince some nobody who thinks he’s safe cos Facebook makes a claim.
        zer0zzz 3y ago
        That’s a huge leap. I never claimed that anyone was safe. I just think your assertions have no basis or citations and you’re posting them from a throwaway. This is the equivalent of writing something on a bathroom stall.
        throwaway2990 3y ago
        Of course I post on a throwaway. HN is full of idiots who downvote cos it goes against what they believe in. Fact is Facebook has been advertising using user data on messenger and WhatsApp. Some believe it’s not possible and some theorise that they analysis the message on the device and send metadata over. But it doesn’t change the fact Facebook is in control of the whole pipeline.
        zer0zzz 3y ago
        You should have started with that, and added some sources (based on reversing, there are many out there). There’s a good claim to be made that even if they don’t use their app to wholesale decrypt chats locally, they do use metadata. Its likely they can’t do a good job of moderating without it.

zer0zzz 3y ago

Agreed, and that’s how it would work. I was more highlighting the throwaway with comment that had no context or link to sources.

throwaway2990 3y ago
There’s been many stories over the years of people being advertised to from things mentioned in what’s meant to be a private conversation.
- zer0zzz 3y ago
  “People are saying…”
  - throwaway2990 3y ago
    “People say trust Facebook because they control the e2e and I can’t imagine an attack vector”
    - zer0zzz 3y ago
      So much for those “many stories”
      - throwaway2990 3y ago
        lol I’m not going to try convince some nobody who thinks he’s safe cos Facebook makes a claim.
        zer0zzz 3y ago
        That’s a huge leap. I never claimed that anyone was safe. I just think your assertions have no basis or citations and you’re posting them from a throwaway. This is the equivalent of writing something on a bathroom stall.
        throwaway2990 3y ago
        Of course I post on a throwaway. HN is full of idiots who downvote cos it goes against what they believe in. Fact is Facebook has been advertising using user data on messenger and WhatsApp. Some believe it’s not possible and some theorise that they analysis the message on the device and send metadata over. But it doesn’t change the fact Facebook is in control of the whole pipeline.
        zer0zzz 3y ago
        You should have started with that, and added some sources (based on reversing, there are many out there). There’s a good claim to be made that even if they don’t use their app to wholesale decrypt chats locally, they do use metadata. Its likely they can’t do a good job of moderating without it.