An international group of plaintiffs is suing Meta, alleging that WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption isn’t actually private. Lawyers are asking the court to certify a class-action.
An international group of plaintiffs is suing Meta, alleging that WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption isn’t actually private. Lawyers are asking the court to certify a class-action.
Yes, it can absolutely still be E2EE: the message is encrypted and the central server does not have the key. The issue is that the clients (i.e. the "E"s) are controlled by the same entity as the central server, and we don’t know exactly what the client (app) is doing. So the fact that it’s E2EE is somewhat moot.
This is exhibit #1 in the case for open-source software.
PS: you obviously get this, I’m just trying to make it clearer for anyone who doesn’t.
Its about their ability to read the message, not the encryption. If anyone else other than the intended recipient, be it Meta or Google or the government, can read the message, then its not “end to end” anymore.
Also even if it were about the keys, it still wouldnt be e2ee, because the app is a black box controlled by Meta so the key is in Metas hands by definition. Any piece of software that they have sole control over is “their hands” and when exfiltrating the messages from your phone they are using that key to decrypt the messages and send them to their servers.
Yeah sure, I understand all that, indeed it’s pretty much exactly what I wrote. You are simply taking an expansive definition of E2EE where I am using a narrow one. As far as we know, Meta is indeed sending its messages in an encrypted state, end to end, so technically it makes the grade as E2EE. That debate is kinda boring, I was simply trying to point out that this case study illustrates the importance of FOSS. And since you are downvoting me, that’s all I have to say here.