41 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2026
    1. WhatsApp has its own backup feature (actually, it has more than one way to do it.) WhatsApp supports end-to-end encrypted backups that can be protected with a password, a 64-digit key, and (more recently) passkeys. WhatsApp’s public docs are here and WhatsApp’s engineering writeup of the key-vault design is here. Conceptually, this is an interesting compromise: it reduces what cloud providers can read, but it introduces new key-management and recovery assumptions (and, depending on configuration, new places to attack). Importantly, even if you think backups are a mess — and they often are — this is still a far cry from the effortless, universal access alleged in this lawsuit.

      WhatsApp has its own backup feature, w additional key pairs etc. But this is not what is being claimed.

    2. If you use native device backup on iOS or Android devices (for example, iCloud device backup or the standard Android/Google backup), your WhatsApp message database may be included in a device backup sent to Apple or Google.

      backed-up decrypted message can be stored elsewhere when you do backups of your phone, e.g. Google or Apple depending on your device

    3. Several online commenters have pointed out that there are loopholes in WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption guarantees. These include certain types of data that are explicitly shared with WhatsApp, such as business communications (when you WhatsApp chat with a company, for example.) In fairness, both WhatsApp and the lawsuit are very clear about these exceptions. These exceptions are real and important. WhatsApp’s encryption protects the content of your messages, it does not necessarily protect information about who you’re talking to, when messages were sent, and how your social graph is structured. WhatsApp’s own privacy materials talk about how personal message content is protected while other categories of data exist.

      The lawsuit is not about metadata, or WhatsApp use within a company which is not E2EE apparently (making it very unsuited for work situations I'd say)

    4. The most important thing to keep in mind here is that Meta’s encryption happens on the client application, the one you run on your phone. If the claims in this lawsuit are true, then Meta would have to alter the WhatsApp application so that plaintext (unencrypted) data would be uploaded from your app’s message database to some infrastructure at Meta, or else the keys would. And this should not be some rare, occasional glitch. The allegations in the lawsuit state that this applied to nearly all users, and for every message ever sent by those users since they signed up. Those constraints would tend to make this a very detectable problem. Even if WhatsApp’s app source code is not public, many historical versions of the compiled app are available for download. You can pull one down right now and decompile it using various tools, to see if your data or keys are being exfiltrated. I freely acknowledge that this is a big project that requires specialized expertise — you will not finish it by yourself in a weekend (as commenters on HN have politely pointed out to me.) Still, reverse-engineering WhatsApp’s client code is entirely possible and various parts of the app have indeed been reversed several times by various security researchers. The answer really is knowable, and if there is a crime, then the evidence is almost certainly* right there in the code that we’re all running on our phones.

      If the claim is correct, one could reverse engineer the app to see if true. Not a low hurdle but possible. 'the answer is knowable'

    5. In the case of WhatsApp, the application software is written by a team inside of Meta. This wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing if the code was open source, and outside experts could review the implementation. Unfortunately WhatsApp is closed-source, which means that you cannot easily download the source code to see if encryption performed correctly, or performed at all. Nor can you compile your own copy of the WhatsApp app and compare it to the version you download from the Play or App Store. (This is not a crazy thing to hope for: you actually can do those things with open-source apps like Signal.)

      WhatsApp being closed source cannot be proven to work as advertised by outsiders. Unlike Signal

    6. Today WhatsApp describes itself as serving on the order of three billion users worldwide, and end-to-end encryption is on by default for personal messaging. They haven’t once been ambiguous about what they claim to offer. That means that if the allegations in the lawsuit proved to be true, this would be one of the largest corporate coverups since Dupont.

      Publicly WhatsApp has always maintained they do E2EE, the lawsuit says otherwise, that would be a major scandal. But also makes the claim hard to swallow

    7. The state of encryption on major messaging apps in early 2026. Notice that three of these platforms are operated by Meta.

      this is a sobering image. Signal at 70 million monthly active users. Apple imessage 1,3 billion Whatsapp 3 billion Instagram 2 billion FB Messenger 1 billion Telegram 1 billion Snapchat 900 million Discord 200million WeChat 1.3 billion Dingtalk 191million QQ 553 million no mention of Threema too tiny I suppose.

    8. should never be able to read the content of your messages.

      no mention here of the type of metadata WhatsApp holds: Signal only if account exists, and when last used. WhatsApp has contact lists and the date / time of every message between sender/receivers etc. That in itself is an issue imo.

    9. Beginning in 2014 (around the time they were acquired by Facebook), the app began rolling out end-to-end (E2E) encryption based on the Signal protocol.

      WhatsApp started rolling out E2EE around the time they were acquired by Meta. They use the Signal protocol

    10. In terms of scale, modern messaging apps are unbelievably huge. At the start of the period in the lawsuit, WhatsApp already had more than one billion monthly active users. Today that number sits closer to three billion. This is almost half the planet. In many countries, WhatsApp is more popular than phone calls.

      Scale of WhatsApp is close to 3 billion people.

  2. Jan 2026
  3. Jul 2023
  4. May 2022
  5. Feb 2022
    1. una copa diaria en el móvil y otra en tu cuenta de Google Drive. Así puedes restaurar los mensajes en el mismo móvil si borras WhatsApp (copia local) y en cualquier otro teléfono (copia en Google Drive) si cambias la aplicación de sitio
      • IMPORTANT:
      • local copy: only to restore in SAME device
      • g. drive: to change to ANOTHER device
  6. Oct 2021
  7. Jul 2021
  8. Feb 2021
  9. Nov 2020
    1. So while it’s nice that I’m able to host my own email, that’s also the reason why my email isn’t end-to-end encrypted, and probably never will be. By contrast, WhatsApp was able to introduce end-to-end encryption to over a billion users with a single software update.

      Although the option to host your own email offers you freedom, it's precisely this freedom that makes change more difficult and the reason why email isn't yet end-to-end encrypted.

      Centralized architectures, like whatsapp, allow you to roll out end-to-end encryption to the entire network with 1 software update.

    1. People want to be able to choose which service they use to communicate with people. However, today if you want to message people on Facebook you have to use Messenger, on Instagram you have to use Direct, and on WhatsApp you have to use WhatsApp. We want to give people a choice so they can reach their friends across these networks from whichever app they prefer.We plan to start by making it possible for you to send messages to your contacts using any of our services, and then to extend that interoperability to SMS too. Of course, this would be opt-in and you will be able to keep your accounts separate if you'd like.

      Facebook plans to make messaging interoperable across Instagram, Facebook and Whatsapp. It will be opt-in.

  10. Aug 2020
  11. Jul 2020
  12. Jun 2020
    1. Just like Blackberry, WhatsApp has claimed that they are end to end encrypted but in fact that is not trueWhatsApp (and Blackberry) decrypt all your texts on their servers and they can read everything you say to anyone and everyoneThey (and Blackberry) then re-encrypt your messages, to send them to the recipient, so that your messages look like they were encrypted the entire time, when in fact they were not
    1. First, the recognition that sensitive information needs to be transmitted securely over instant messaging platforms plays into the hands of the privacy advocates who are against backdoors in the end-to-end encryption used on WhatsApp, Signal, Wickr, iMessage and others. The core argument from the privacy lobby is that a backdoor will almost certainly be exploited by bad actors. Clearly, the EU (and others) would not risk their own comms with such a vulnerability.
    1. According to a UN spokesperson, Farhan Haq “Every senior UN official has been instructed to refrain from using WhatsApp for official communication since it is not a secure medium. So, I do not think the Secretary-General uses it”. In addition, he revealed that the instruction dates back to June last year.
  13. May 2020
  14. Apr 2020
  15. Mar 2020
  16. Nov 2019
  17. Apr 2016
    1. Telegram's server-side software is closed-source and proprietary. Pavel Durov has said that it would require a major architectural redesign of the server-side software to connect independent servers to the Telegram cloud.[50]

      Does that fact actually make Telegram a real alternative to WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger?