Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 168 posts

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#121

Post by moxie »

newman314 wrote: post #67
SapphireSun wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really curious. I've been using Signal for years, and it's been much much better than the default app on my phone (not to mention more secure). What's so good about Telegram? I've avoided it because of its suspicious encryption.

To be clear, I'm not advocating for the use of Telegram. I keep posting this in hopes that moxie will understand just how important UX is and hire accordingly. WhatsApp, Telegram etc. are going to eat Signal's lunch because of the UX and I would like that not to happen.

lol, yeah the problem is that it just never occurred to us that UX is important!

Here's the situation: people hem and haw about Telegram's cryptography, but what we should really be talking about is that Telegram is not using end to end encryption by default. Telegram stores your entire plaintext message history server-side. There is nothing worse when it comes to privacy, but it's very easy to write slick clients when they're just views onto the server and all the logic happens there.

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#122

Post by moxie »

roymurdock wrote: post #13
adrtessier wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

John Gilmore's oft quoted in these cases: "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." When, if ever, will politicians learn this? Will it take a generation that has grown up on the Internet and watched this to make them realize these actions are pretty futile?

This is exactly what the judge wants. He is trying to get Whatsapp to comply with his request. What could be a better way to do this then to drive millions of users to a competitor? The longer Whatsapp holds out, the more users leave the service, possibly for good. Thing is, this better be a really important case. Because if users migrate and stay on Telegram, it could be much harder for Brazilian courts to get recor…

> Thing is, this better be a really important case. Because if users migrate and stay on Telegram, it could be much harder for Brazilian courts to get records in the future.

Why would it be harder? Telegram has the entire plaintext message history for every message all of their users have ever sent, WhatsApp doesn't. It's much easier for Telegram to comply, not harder.

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#123

Post by moxie »

jmcphers wrote: post #54
newman314 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ugh. I wish Signal had the UX to compete with Telegram so that people would use Signal instead.

This. When my wife first got an Android phone I installed Signal on there as the default SMS app (she values her privacy and was worried about Google Hangouts). This lasted for almost a day until she tried to send a group text to a few of her friends. When she found out she had to create a named group first, she asked me to install a different messaging app immediately.

FYI, both WhatsApp and Telegram work the same way.

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#124

Post by lucasnemeth »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #5

The news is misrepresenting what is actually happening. A judge ruled for a 48 hour ban of WhatsApp from telcos to try to coerce WhatsApp into releasing private chat information for an ongoing criminal investigation (wild guess: they want information from politically exposed actors due to the recent corruption investigations). There are precedents, and that's a tactic local judges are using to try to get cooperation…

It's a confidencial investigation, you have no reason to believe it is a politically exposed actor. It can be any sort of investigation, this is highly manipulative. The people who actually created this block wants to make you think it's related to the Lava-Jato, but they are probably doing it due to lobbists from telecom industries.

They could fine facebook, the owner of whatsapp and that have offices in Brazil. It is unrelated to close the service. Has the Brazilian government ever closed Vivo or Tim because it had legal problems? No. They charge fines.

There are precedents, and they were absurd.

All the information on the article regarding Cunha is correct.

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#125

Post by lucasnemeth »

dogma1138 wrote: post #116
logicchains wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When company does not cooperate you force it to do so by any means available to you. Some people don't consider this "might makes right" morally compelling.

This isn't might makes right this is a corporation pissing over laws, if this was some oil company killing seals would you respond in the same manner? WhatsApp provides a service in a country, they gain direct financial benefit from almost 100M users, they received a subpoena and ignored it because it's Brazil, if this would've been a European nation they would most likely have complied, if it were a US court order t…

Things should be taken into consideration, a "confidential" investigation that closes an service used by millions of citizens is highly controversial. They don't do the same to any Telecom company, so that's very suspicious.

A spilling of oil is not controversial. It's damage made by a company accidentally and that is causing great environmental damage.

The Brazilian government has the power to ask try to enforce their legislation, but asking other companies to close the service should be the last thing they do. And if necessary, they should close the service completely, 48h is pure nonsense. They should arrest representatives before closing the service. this is nonsense. Also, the reasons are all confidential, so we can't even know it they are justifiable. This is manipulative, not transparent, and very keen to a dictatorship.

Lastly. Brazil is a "western" nation...

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#126

Post by fernandomm »

The real reason is that WhatsApp refused to provide information about a PCC member.

PCC is the largest criminal organization in Brazil. It's involved in several criminal activities like drug dealing and gun trafficking. It was also responsible for "closing" Sao Paulo city some years ago forcing people to stay at their homes as well as killing hundreds of cops ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primeiro_Comando_da_Capital ).

The judge tried to obtain the information from WhatsApp for several months but it was simply ignored. Blocking WhatsApp was one of the last options that she had to try to obtain the information.

Here is more information from a reliable source ( it's in portuguese ): http://www.conjur.com.br/2015-dez-16/bloqueio-whatsapp-pivo-...

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#127

Post by cnvogel »

misja111 wrote: post #118

I'm confused. As far as I know WhatsApp does not archive any messages on its servers. Messages are only kept there temporarily until they are delivered to the recipient and then they are deleted. This is also what WhatsApp states in its legal documentation: https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/ : "The contents of messages that have been delivered by the WhatsApp Service are not copied, kept or archived by WhatsApp in the n…

> Furthermore, messages are end-to-end encrypted.

I don't think so. WhatsApp states in their FAQ: "WhatsApp communication between your phone and our server is encrypted." [https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/21864047]

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#128

Post by sangnoir »

andreyf wrote: post #107
gotchange wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does WhatsApp have any physical presence in Brazil? Did they incorporate any subsidiary there?

I don't know, but for the sake of argument, I think it's OK to say no. If I have a website that is reachable on the internet that hosts a wiki and logs access, does that mean I am doing business in all countries that have internet access? Can any of their courts compel me to disclose visitors from their country? What if I refuse to provide visitor logs, is it OK for them to block my site at the border? What about to…

It looks like you want to have your cake and eat it:

> If I have a website that is reachable on the internet that hosts a wiki and logs access, does that mean I am doing business in all countries that have internet access?

I'm guessing your answer to this question is "No". However, since you feel you are not doing business in Brazil (for example),then why complain when Brazil blocks your site? If your answer is "Yes" and you agree that you are in business in all countries, then you should be compelled to follow the laws of the countries whose populace are earning you wealth.

Morally and pragmatically, I feel that if you gain financial benefit from a country, you should follow their laws. If you find the laws unconscionable - refuse to do business there.

Re: Brazilian Judge Shuts Down WhatsApp for 48 Hours

#130

Post by lagadu »

msh wrote: post #87
sdm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does whatsapp make money from users in Brazil? Then yes, it has a business presence in Brazil.

No, that's not the international legal definition for a business presence. My point is that Brazil should follow legal procedures and have a American judge issue a supena. That's what a MLAT is for.

They are following legal procedures. Brazilian ones, which are the only ones they have to care about. Why would they possibly care in the slightest what American courts have to say?
Post reply on HN