149
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] heygooberman@lemmy.today 38 points 11 months ago

Great! But, let's remember this is Facebook after all, so... 🤷‍♂️

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 33 points 11 months ago

Fuck facebook

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 31 points 11 months ago
[-] iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's end-to-end-to-end encryption.

Your data is now encrypted while they mine it.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

Well WhatsApp already has it

[-] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Moxie helped WhatsApp integrate the Signal protocol for e2ee, but I dont trust thatt they never implemented any backdoors in their protocol after Moxie was done helping them.

IMO, just use Signal anyways. Fuck Meta

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago
[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago
[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

Do you believe everything you hear a company say who has proven themselves to be untrustworthy?

End to end doesn’t necessarily mean that the middle can’t read it, it just means strangers listening can’t read it. WhatsApp isn’t open source, and auditing that encryption on a binary level would prove difficult.

As we have seen, companies can also bow to the wills of governments, and if enough pressure is applied they often agree to backdoors.

If it’s not open source, it’s a scam.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

End to end doesn’t necessarily mean that the middle can’t read it, it just means strangers listening can’t read it.

I thought it meant nobody between the two ends can read it.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

End->(public network)->WhatsApp->(public network)->End

So, no stranger can read it.

The key word is stranger. WhatsApp made the encryption you’re using and could (and I’m sure does) have the ability to decrypt it.

True end to end is where you and your partner have keys and you both encrypt on the client side, and don’t tell the middle man. That way no malicious intent from the server could ever decrypt the actual message.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

True end to end is where you and your partner have keys and you both encrypt on the client side, and don’t tell the middle man. That way no malicious intent from the server could ever decrypt the actual message.

That's how the Signal protocol they're using is working

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

WhatsApp is not peer to peer.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago
[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

What is it you thought they were saying?

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

You seem confused. E2EE doesn't mean peer-to-peer. Signal protocol isn't peer-to-peer. You don't need to be peer-to-peer to have secure communication because E2EE makes it so that the server can't read what the two ends are writing.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Can we verify they are still using the Signal protocol?

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

If they are, they’ve probably modified it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] GaimDS@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago

I don't believe it for a second ngl 🫠

[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

I believe it, but only as a cost saving measure. By enabling e2ee they can wiggle out of having to deal with warrants and the government. It's about reducing the burden on their data retention and reporting teams.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I don't believe there's ever been an instance of E2EE Messenger texts being given to law enforcement, whereas there are plenty of instances where Facebook has provided law enforcement with non-encrypted messages after being served a warrant.

Believe what you want, but ignoring the legal liability from blatantly lying like that, there's precisely zero evidence that Messenger's encryption is compromised.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

The encryption doesn't have to be compromised when their app does the message scanning before encrypting.

Technically it's still E2EE

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

Sure, but at that point, it's a legitimate question of what goal you're trying to satisfy with E2EE. This doesn't prevent metadata analysis being used for marketing purposes - and if that's something you're strongly against, that's perfectly fair - but it does make it completely impossible for message content to be provided to law enforcement, even in the face of a warrant. That is hugely powerful, because we've already seen cases of FB Messenger texts being used to go after women who get abortions, just for one example. In countries with truly oppressive governments, that benefit can't be overstated.

Sure, Facebook will try to sell you some shit, but they're not going to send the police to arrest you. Having E2EE is a strict improvement over the status quo, and if you do care deeply about privacy on the more commercial side, there's always Signal or other privacy-first services.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ElectroVagrant@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

Personally I'm about as willing to trust this as WhatsApp's end-to-end encryption, given Meta/Facebook's involvement, but thought it was worth keeping folks here apprised of the situation in the corporate space.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Has WhatsApp's encryption ever been shown to not be trustworthy?

Facebook has had to provide law enforcement with FB Messenger texts before after being served a warrant. Are you saying this has also happened with WhatsApp, even though that should be impossible? That's a pretty big claim, so I'd love to see your evidence.

[-] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago
  1. It’s Facebook

  2. It’s closed source

Zero trust from me, not touching any of that

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

So, no evidence. Gotcha.

For WhatsApp, given how much noise the UK law enforcement has been making about trying to ban encryption, I'm inclined to believe it actually is working. I'm sure Facebook does some metadata analysis and that does feed back into their advertising profiles, but that's a different thing from being able to turn over actual message content that's supposedly been encrypted over to law enforcement.

But hey, if you do find actual evidence, I'm all ears.

[-] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago

I’m not the person you responded to, so I made no claims that need any evidence.

I just love shitting on fucking rubbish Facebook and will do so online at any point possible.

Fuck yo evidence and fuck yo Facebook

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Most people don't so openly state that they don't care about facts or evidence and form their beliefs primarily from vibes, so thanks for at least being upfront about it.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

The evidence we have is the historic behaviour of Facefuck and Zuckerfuck.

Fuck anything connected to this asshole.

They could easily scan your messages via the app before encrypting.

Being closed source we have no way to examine this.

But yea, keep on trusting an org that has repeatedly demonstrated they're untrustworthy.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

In case you were unaware, you come off as a literal child. Cheers.

[-] ElectroVagrant@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

To my knowledge, it hasn't, but that's not the main point of my comment so much as expressing my distrust of the parent company. In that respect, no, I'm not aiming to make a claim that Meta/Facebook have had to disclose messages from WhatsApp to law enforcement and essentially undermine its end-to-end-encryption.

Nevertheless, I think it's reasonable and fair to be suspicious of Meta/Facebook given its history of questionable actions concerning people's data. They're in the business of using people's data for marketing/advertising purposes, not safeguarding it, after all.

[-] yildo@kbin.social 11 points 11 months ago

Is it going to be like Whatsapp end-to-end encryption where they just rolled out a 4-digit pincode for "backups" on their servers as the third end?

[-] ElectroVagrant@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It sounds like it, although it looks like it's a 6-digit pin instead from the image in the article.

There's also this additional info directly from Facebook's blog post about all this:

When your chats are upgraded, you will be prompted to set up a recovery method, such as a PIN, so you can restore your messages if you lose, change or add a device.

[-] NENathaniel@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

Is your issue that it's 4 digits, or something else?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago

So Facebook, the company that reviews your private messages ( https://money.com/facebook-reviews-private-messages/ ) will let you encrypt your messages to other messenger users (That it also monitors) so that a third party can't get that data without paying them first?

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I mean if its not encrypted, that could only ever be double-speak. If they say its e2ee, I'm sure they're still hoovering metadata but thats a strong claim that requires rigorous implementation thats going to be tested equally rigorously. Still think people should delete the app tho

[-] jacktherippah@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Ah yes, we do end to end encryption bro! Trust me bro!

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Meta is rolling out end-to-end encryption for one-on-one chats and calls on Messenger, finally fulfilling a promise that’s been in the works for quite awhile.

“Our engineers, cryptographers, designers, policy experts and product managers have worked tirelessly to rebuild Messenger features from the ground up.”

According to Crisan, you won’t sacrifice Messenger features when using encrypted chats, so you’ll still be able to use things like themes and custom reactions.

“I believe the future of communication will increasingly shift to private, encrypted services where people can be confident what they say to each other stays secure and their messages and content won’t stick around forever,” he wrote in a Facebook post.

Last year, the company drew headlines when a 17-year-old from Nebraska and her mother faced criminal charges for performing an illegal abortion after police obtained their Messenger chat history.

Anti-encryption advocates say that the technology makes it harder to find bad actors on messaging apps like WhatsApp, which is already encrypted by default.


The original article contains 378 words, the summary contains 164 words. Saved 57%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
149 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59407 readers
2592 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS