A 10-month Commerce Department probe concluded Meta could view all WhatsApp messages in unencrypted form
It’s decided. No more arms deals on Whatsapp for this guy.
Just assume anything you’re writing online, on any app, any website, any social media platform… ANYTHING is being tracked now.
We learned from the FBI’s disclosure of the Guthrie kidnapping video that every camera and microphone are surveilling you and feeding that data into a government database without a warrant, so why would you think your apps are doing anything different?
No. Shit.
People who say Facebook (now Meta) paid $21 billion (with a B) for WhatsApp to be charitable. Even though the original creators have distanced themselves from it after the acquisition.
Fun fact: every forum running phpBB, Invision, or vBulletin (as in, traditional Internet forums) can read your DMs in plaintext. They’re unencrypted in the SQL database. However, the forum’s Admin Control Panel (ACP) does not provide this functionality. All three have mods that add it in. So imagine you run a forum. You have a hidden forum where only your mods and admins can interact. No one else can even see it. You could have a whole other one that is just all the DMs. I’m not sure about social networks. But I know if you have command-line access to the SQL database, you can query a user and see everything that user has put in the database. Public messages… and private ones. So a lot of the forums started saying “Personal messages” or “Direct messages” instead of “Private messages” because they were never private.
Disbelieve anyone who says they can’t see your private or personal messages.
I can confirm this, I used to run several phpbb and (pirated) vbulletin juggalo forums and when I found out this was possible I read everyone’s DMs for funzies.
Lotttts of requests for noodz.
So the truth is they store messages encrypted. But what they also do is storing the private keys for those messages.
Meaning they technically do it. But it’s like locking the door for someone who also has the keys.
Creating the secure key pairs used for true E2EE requires a mathematical foundation of true randomness, which can only be achieved on a device by working with the OS, through an API call, to get a random seed that includes pseudorandom numbers from the device’s sensors. There was a post a while back where a dev used ADB to read the API calls used during WhatsApp account setup that showed that no such calls were made, meaning the keys were either totally predictable, or were actually generated by Meta themselves.
When I read the article about cloudflare using lava lamps (and other things at other locations) to create randomness I had no idea it had to be that crazy to be random.
It actually doesn’t need to be so elaborate. Even a video camera with the lens cap on generates more than enough entropy. Your phone can mix together predictable but unique variations - time of day, free memory, CPU serial number, battery level - with less predictable physical sensory - light level, gyroscope, barometer, last touch points, nearby MAC addresses - to create far more on-board randomness than anyone realistically needs.
That said, the whole Cloudflare lava lamp thing is very cool and also gets people talking.
I’m just here to satisfy my confirmation bias, but my question all along has been this: how does Meta simultaneously satisfy their claims of both E2EE and content moderation on WhatsApp? I can’t say that I’ve done anything even close to a deep dive on the topic, but those two things seem mutually exclusive.
You can actually report a message to WhatsApp within the app. If you report the message it then the full text gets sent to WhatsApp.
That’s a little disingenuous…
- You receive an encrypted message.
- You decrypt the message.
- You report the message.
- You forward the decrypted message.
When you send a message, no E2EE scheme can prevent your recipient from forwarding the decrypted message to a third party.
So… anyone with access to the report API can read any message they want?
Any reported message ? Back when I was doing anti spam at my ISP we could read reported spam from our customers. Obviously not all mails from / to the customers. That would be way disproportionate.
If this is true:
If you report the message it then the full text gets sent to WhatsApp.
That means there’s a software switch that dumps a plaintext copy of a supposedly encrypted message when flipped.
Therefore, all you need to read any WhatsApp message is the ability to flag the message as “reported”, and access to wherever the plaintext copies get sent.
Considering how often security is an afterthought for corporations, the access part is probably easy.
That means there’s a software switch that dumps a plaintext copy of a supposedly encrypted message when flipped.
Kinda, sorta, but no, not really. What’s happening is that the recipient is decrypting the message. When you report the message, you include a cleartext copy with your report.
The “switch” you are talking about is in the same app that is doing the decryption. For the bad actor to toggle that “switch”, they would have to control the app.
The easiest implementation of this is that the recipient of an infringing message flags it from its local client. At that point it’s not encrypted if their claim of e2ee is true.
It also means that only parties involved in the message exchange can flag / report them.
Corporations are often not so monolithic ; the guys doing abuse are likely not the one who try to milk users (looking at you marketing).
I don’t particularly know much about this specific topic but, it would be trivial for them to read what’s seen in the app. The encrypted part is only during transfer of a message, your app is still decrypting it to plain texts, and meta can just read the message at that point.
Didn’t read the article, but maybe a back door to spy on people?
I never assumed that this presumed “end to end encryption” was secure in any way. The key exchange either runs over Meta servers, and they just log them, or the client software simply surrenders the key (maybe always, maybe on demand) together with the data stream that still runs over Meta servers.
I also never assumed it was fully secure either. Like sure it could be secure to hackers since they would still need the keys, but if anyone ever thought Meta was somehow not going to allow themselves access is just crazy and I am shocked anyone thought differently. On top of this they absolutely share all data with the government, im just not sure if it’s by request or full access anytime.
Sadly, everyone i know still uses it so im kind of forced to but at the same time the chats are all dumb anyway so whatever and enjoy reading them Meta employees.
They can log anything they want and have nothing useful, if the encryption protocol is sound.
Have a look at how TLS is designed, if you want to know more.I know my way around cryptography, therefor I am skeptical. If push comes to shove, they can simply command the Whatsapp App to silently surrender the keys. Nobody would know, it is a closed source app and protocol, and they can hide what they are doing inside the (probably) TLS encrypted stream.
You can have the soundest encryption in the world but if they have access to the keys it doesn’t matter, they can see everything.
But the key exchange is not the issue then.
Access to private keys is.
If the host system, on which the key exchange runs, is compromised, you’re toast.Where’s the private key? I can get a new phone, log with WhatsApp and download all the historical messages without intruducing any additional password or key.
I assume they have all the required data too.
@Railcar8095 @zergtoshi actually is not my exlerience with whatsapp, since I have the backups disable, everytime I change phones I lost all my conversations. But since whatsapp is closed source, the app can indeed use encryption to comunicate p2p, but I will allways assume that the key is logged by meta, “just in case”
Sounds like a compromised phone in the sense that it doesn’t protect (and instead transmit) the private key.
That’s not the phones fault, but how WhatsApp works
How is a phone not compromised if it hosts apps that play into the hands of evil actors?
“The claim that WhatsApp can access people’s encrypted communications is patently false,” Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said. He added that the bureau had already “disavowed this purported investigation, calling its own employee’s allegations unsubstantiated.”
I can’t help but notice that in response to people’s concern that Meta may be able to read people’s messages, the Meta spokesperson responds that WhatsApp can’t read them. A little bit of administrative juggling on Meta’s end so that the team with access to the messages doesn’t fall within the WhatsApp department, and both claims could be true.
But Facebook/“Meta” would never lie.
Oopsie! Hang on, they even lie to lawmakers in case buying them off fails? Bummer!
Seriously: this company needs to be scoured from the face of the earth.
Are you telling me that the company that hosts “free” not propaganda services and has been caught repeatedly stealing all possible data including data about women and presumably girls’ periods and has been caught in one of the largest data manipulation scandals this century could be betraying my trust with their “vawwy vawwy pwivate and vawwy vawwy encwypted” closed source and again operated by the most sinister motherfuckers of all time messaging app???
I. Am. Shocked.
I’m also looking for a bridge on the cheap if you guys have any leads.
Yeah, there are lots of ways for this to be true but misleading:
The communications are not encrypted if they have the keys.
The encrypted communications are not the people’s. By the TOS everything is the property of WhatsApp and they can access their own ‘Business Records’ perfectly legally.
A third party, like a federal agency, isn’t WhatsApp. (WhatsApp can also voluntarily give their ‘Business Records’ to said agencies without warrant or subpoena.)
Meta isn’t WhatsApp.
An internal project with an undisclosed codename isn’t WhatsApp.
Nitpicking; even if they have the keys, the messages can be encrypted. It’s just worthless as they can now decrypt them.
My favorite option is that they don’t access the encrypted communications, they access messages before encryption takes place and send copies home for safe keeping. With a closed source client they can do anything they want to the plaintext even if they handle the ciphertext appropriately.
Which end is the encrypted end lmao
C’mon. It’s not that hard. You’re making the assumption that Andy Stone is telling the truth, with a gotchya astrict.
What if…the big business just…LIES???
The best lies have some kind of truth in them. Half truths are way more effective than complete falsehoods.
a gotchya astrict
Asterisk? This little fella? *
Nah, probably meant the other little fella - Asterix the Gaul.
Then they might get in trouble for false advertising.
In what world do you live where billionsires face actual consequences?
Worst case scenario, Meta pays a small fine, and doesn’t even blink. The day just goes on.
I mean yeah, but they’d usually not pay even a small fine (or pay for legal proceedings), so it’s a lot more efficient to use conveniently placed loopholes.
GDPR has entered the chat
…assuming the EU representatives have some balls
If you can’t see the code (closed source) then treat it as they’re lying and it isn’t end to end encrypted
The most important question to ask when evaluating end-to-end encryption: who manages the keys?
If Facebook manages all of the keys and is responsible for telling which public key belongs to who, then of course Facebook can read every message.
oh lol. the trust chain is harder and harder to verify these days. i miss the good old days where I would write emails in vi and encrypt with gpg.
I still write emails with vi. but I lost touch with the one other friend I had who knew how to use gpg 😂😂😂
There are dozens of us! Dozens!
Cory Doctorow still uses pgp if you email him, I think his key is on his website, IIRC
even better - as far as I am aware the client isn’t open (and even if it were, is your installed build from the same source?).
so, even if the keys are local only, who says there isn’t a hidden API that simply sends locally decrypted content back to a remotely calling endpoint?
Or steganographically leaks back the keys …
thought it was proper e2e
https://signal.org/blog/whatsapp-complete/
but if whatsapp owns both ends, what is stopping them from just reading the decrypted text? i duno crypto good enough
That, and if WhatsApp has the keys, then no amount of encryption is going to help.
If I remember, the allegation was that they did keep all the keys and many employees could request them to decrypt specific sessions.
Settle down. There’s nothing to see here. Move along quietly and please remain calm… /s
bold of you to assume meta respect data privacy, they have been all in on datamining for a while aready
And here I thought the E2EE of Whatsapp was based on the one developed by Signal or at least so they say.
But I guess it’s hard to inspect anything, if it’s no open source software.
I’m so glad there’s SIgnal and a lot of my contacts use it.
Back when it was called Textsecure it was a different story.If you still use faecesbook products, you’re an idiot.
I’m gonna borrow FaecesBook from you - that’s hilarious!
my brain automatically makes it faecesbook now. I’ve been saying it for a decade or more.
I guess you don’t live in Europe, you can’t escape it here.
So that ad campaign that they ran saying no one but you can see your messages. That was a bit strange that they were pushing it, since no one appeared to be saying otherwise, might be a lie? I never would have guessed.
