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

WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 629 posts

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#461

Post by devishard »

rb2k_ wrote: post #296
shostack wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if they record the necessary analytics data from mining the text, and then delete the actual text. Depending on what data you're trying to mine, you may be able to get what you need on transmission, and then dump the source data in favor of the output of the analytics event.

The chats are end-to-end encrypted, so there is no plain text anyone could "mine"

That's true if you believe WhatsApp (and I do with some probability of certainty--not certain enough to trust it with data I wouldn't want the government to see, but enough that I'm comfortable hackers won't get my bank info).

But, the NSA approach to data collection is basically to vacuum it all up and, if possible, decrypt it later. This has two implications:

1. Metadata. "We kill people based on metadata" isn't a joke, it's a quote from Michael Hayden, ex-executive in both the NSA and CIA. End-to-end encryption doesn't hide who you're talking to or when.

2. It seems unlikely that it will be computationally possible for them to decrypt all traffic, but it would only surprise me a little if AES128 is breakable for high-value targets in the next 20 years: increased computing power, better multi-threading, better cryptanalysis algorithms, maybe quantum computing or some completely unexpected technology; it's hard to say what will come along.

In short: mining encrypted data still matters.

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#462

Post by ashitlerferad »

Zombieball wrote: post #416
lawpoop wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has no presence in Brazil. If they have no presence in Brazil, how did they get shut down in Brazil? I don't mean to be glib, but I don't see how the two concepts jive with each other. On a purely practical level, if they were interesting in maintaining their service in Brazil, why didn't they establish a presence in Brazil when all these previous orders and shutdowns were going on? This is like ignoring notices in…

> If they have no presence in Brazil, how did they get shut down in Brazil? Blocked at the ISP level.

Seems like a flaw in the service if it can be shut down that easily.

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#463

Post by kerkeslager »

boobsbr wrote: post #356
whatever_dude wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Orders like these are normally written out by judges that are completely oblivious to how reality works. Adding to that the fact that people with power know they tend to get things their way in Brazil, and that the government is all-powerful, I'm quite sure this guy just assumed he could change the laws of the universe with a stroke of his pen.

> he could change the laws of the universe with a stroke of his pen that's how the legislative and judiciary branches think here in Brazil, write the problems away with a law. it called 'canetada'.

> it called 'canetada'.

It's wonderful to have a succinct word for a concept like that; I wish there were such a word in English. Do you have any background information about the origins and meaning of this word?

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#464

Post by Lxr »

alias240 wrote: post #434
rb2k_ wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The chats are end-to-end encrypted, so there is no plain text anyone could "mine"

Unless they are covertly decrypting them on the fly using a master key.

Shouldn't that be impossible by definition?

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#465

Post by kybernetyk »

soneca wrote: post #64

I'm here to defend the judge's ruling, a position very unpopular among all my friends here in Brazil. Brazilian law regarding regarding privacy of users of internet services is very recent and clear: if a judge order the company to share a specific user data, the company must comply. You can disagree with the law, but the law is there. Now, the judge ordered Whatsapp to share a particular user conversation (a suspect…

So 100M people have to suffer because one person mis-used a tool? That's disproportionately harsh punishment and not to defend in any case.

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#466

Post by Dolores12 »

mirimir wrote: post #456
soneca wrote: post #64

I'm here to defend the judge's ruling, a position very unpopular among all my friends here in Brazil. Brazilian law regarding regarding privacy of users of internet services is very recent and clear: if a judge order the company to share a specific user data, the company must comply. You can disagree with the law, but the law is there. Now, the judge ordered Whatsapp to share a particular user conversation (a suspect…

Well, it is Whatsapp's fault if they're that easy to block! Brazil is a pretty big user base. Maybe they ought to come up with a workaround?

You suggest to break the law and should be punished just for that.

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#468

Post by kybernetyk »

lerpa wrote: post #407
habosa wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I am a big fan of this particular law/result, but I want to highlight the second half of your sentence: "if they don't like the laws they shouldn't access the market" That is something the HN crowd does not seem to understand/respect. Most of us enjoy the personal protection of the law yet we want to whip up a webapp and have no laws apply to us.

Bad laws are bad laws, it's idiotic to support them.

Not only idiotic but also immoral. If you obey an immoral law you are acting in a way which strengthens that law and keeps other people under its influence. By your actions you are essentially condemning people to be affected by an immoral law - which in itself is immoral behavior.

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#469

Post by yason »

They should shut down access to the whole internet in Brazil, then. It happens to be full of companies, forums, services and data networks which probably don't give a rat's sit-upon about what the law in Brazil or any other country says but just keep on transmitting messages and bits from user to user.

I don't think being a messenger should come with obligations to divulge private persons' conversations or, more generally, bits to anyone. Local laws can force local companies to do so but it has nothing much to do with internet: a letter remailing company (or, the post office, as we used to say in the 1900's) could provide similar service.

To generalise, all private communications reduce down to talking in private. If you really had to, you could talk to your friend in private and there's nothing any government could do to retrieve those conversations back after the fact. Technological means just make the communication more flexible but it should not mean the conversation should become less private just because it happens on the internet instead of the local backwoods.

In fact, when governments (across the globe) do that it will only motivate creating solutions which make it impossible for the company to hand over their customer's data, with end-to-end and client-side encryption. Yet all governments do see that it's their right to make demands because it's always the easy thing to do.

Re: WhatsApp, Used by 100M Brazilians, Shut Down Nationwide Today by a Single Judge

#470

Post by danvet »

escape_goat wrote: post #453
devishard wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, WhatsApp is a US company and has no presence in Brazil. Under many readings of US law (specifically, ECPA), US companies are in fact prohibited from complying with requests from foreign law enforcement for content, except in emergencies. Instead, foreign law enforcement must make a request for assistance to the US DoJ, which will then (eventually, and maybe) process it and serve it on the US company. This is…

> In fact, it's kind of insensitive for foreigners to suggest that a judge of a sovereign nation must consider US law in his rulings. My apologies, but I think that if you re-read what was written, you will find that this was not suggested. The comment was written in response to one that came to the conclusion that this "was all [WhatsApp's] fault." It is suggesting that WhatsApp is not at fault, is probably strictly…

Complying or not complying to a foreing judges orders is a pretty common problem for any multinational company. Even if they have local presensence, the thing requested (data, object, whatever) might be somewhere else. And simply fetching it across a border on a foreign judges order can get you into trouble for "aiding a foreign power" and stuff like that.

It's worse that most local judges simple don't know that there's even a problem, and even if that'a clear to them, the judge most likely has 0 experience in making a successful request to the foreign state. And since all bureaucrats if the request isn't perfect it falls through the cracks. So often (at least if you're locally present) your laywers will need to help the judge to draft and push such a request through.

Long story short: These jurisdictional issues are not at all US specific, it's everywhere. Sovereign states just don't like it all over if their citizens and companies do stuff within their borders under orders of a foreign state.

Post reply on HN