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

WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

faq.whatsapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 178 posts

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#131

Post by rakoo »

hornokpleas wrote: post #101
PennRobotics wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I chuckled when our daycare had a lengthy discussion about data privacy and, twenty minutes later, asked every parent to join the WA group.

In the Whatsapp group, you don't have to share anything about yourself or your child that you don't want to. The daycare might only post very generic info about opening times, events, etc, or it might be one used only for parents to communicate among themselves, at their option. Facebook know who is in the group and what they post but none of it is necessarily confidential information. On the other hand, the daycare…

Let's turn your question on its head: if using an application fighting to keep users' privacy as high as possible, such as Signal, just as easy as using Whatsapp, why use the latter ?

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#132

Post by indigo945 »

oblio wrote: post #128
latk wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transport encryption is table stakes. It's really no longer something that can be mentioned as if it were something special. When I browse to a random website I don't think “wow HTTPS, so secure”. The channel client service is encrypted, but the service still gets all of the data in plaintext. On a technical level, Telegram is are as secure as Facebook Messenger. Both offer transport encryption and optionally E2EE se…

The thing with E2E encryption, is it really verifiable? Has anyone actually gotten/extracted the WhatsApp secrets and then checked that what goes in one end comes out the other fully encrypted, systematically? After all, everything goes through WhatsApp's proprietary clients and servers, we don't know what voodoo they do along the way. Just because they claim it's E2E encrypted, doesn't really make it so, I'd imagine…

They had Moxie Marlinspike, who is behind Signal, audit their encryption code. Of course, we can't know if the code they let him audit is actually the code that gets deployed, and it's also been a few years since then, but the E2EE has been independently confirmed.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#133

Post by dijit »

sneak wrote: post #112
DeathArrow wrote: post #104

Instead of arguing how bad WhatsApp is in terms of privacy, people would be better off by switching to more privacy respecting alternatives such as Telegram or Signal. I know it's hard to switch if most of your friends are on WhatsApp, but you can talk to them and switch together.

Telegram is not end to end encrypted, and thus does not preserve privacy at all. The best way to get your friends to switch messengers is to not be reachable on the bad ones: ie delete your accounts and uninstall the apps . Retaining your account on bad platforms makes those platforms more attractive to other users and makes the world worse.

If both ends and the server are all controlled by the same entity: it largely doesn't matter if it's E2EE or not.

You can obviously argue that they can't siphon away information at the server level; but if you don't trust whatsapp/signal/telegram at that level then you're boned anyway because they could quite easily activate the 'whatsapp web' function and exfiltrate information via whatsapp servers.

Ideally we'd have clients and servers and server operators as distinct and uncoordinated individuals, which would have to work in conjunction with each other to unravel your messages: but there's no incentive for them in place to do that.

I, a server operator, can pass encrypted traffic, that data is encrypted with clients I don't/can't control.

I, a client software developer can make encrypted traffic, but messages can only be passed on networks I can't control. (and if it didn't, this would be easy to spot).

I, a server software developer can write software which allows traffic to be passed but does not promote an operator to exfil even encrypted data.

We have this with Matrix, IRC, XMPP etc;

IMO if you're going to use Whatsapp; it's the same as if you use telegram or signal; I understand that this opinion is controversial but you're choosing convinience over security and E2E doesn't mean anything if you have one entity controlling the ends.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#134

Post by thelittleone »

lobocinza wrote: post #121
johannes1234321 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This works for some. However if the sports club of your kid uses WhatsApp to announce training times etc. your kid might miss information etc. Even niftier: In some countries Facebook created this "FreeBasics/internet.org" scheme where access to Facebook services is free. When travelling Indonesia WhatsApp was the only way to reach the landlords of guest apartments, taxi drivers, ... not even regular SMS/text. The st…

I reply to people on Telegram when they message me on Whatsapp if they happen to have a Telegram account.

That would make a cool bot. Followed by block them on Whatsapp. One by one no more whatsapp.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#136

Post by hornokpleas »

rakoo wrote: post #131
hornokpleas wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Whatsapp group, you don't have to share anything about yourself or your child that you don't want to. The daycare might only post very generic info about opening times, events, etc, or it might be one used only for parents to communicate among themselves, at their option. Facebook know who is in the group and what they post but none of it is necessarily confidential information. On the other hand, the daycare…

Let's turn your question on its head: if using an application fighting to keep users' privacy as high as possible, such as Signal, just as easy as using Whatsapp, why use the latter ?

The premise of your question is obviously flawed: it is not as easy. The precise reason why WA is used is that it's easier, because vastly more people already have it installed.

But anyway, it's just not a priority for a daycare.

Guaranteeing that for example staff don't respond to enquiries about children's health unless it's from the parents is a priority.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#137

Post by zwaps »

Someone wrote: post #87
nextaccountic wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The news here is that you can't choose to not share data with Facebook anymore.

It’s not practical for most, but I think you can, by moving to the European Region. Comparing https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/updates/terms-of-service/?lan... to https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/terms-of-service-eea/?lang=en , the EU version removes - “Ways To Improve Our Services. We analyze how you make use of WhatsApp, in order to improve our Services, including helping businesses who use WhatsApp measure the effecti…

It is utterly naive to think that Facebook does not plainly ignore the regulations here. They have done it everywhere else. And once the data is in the model, the Goose is cooked. Who cares about a few million fine?

In fact, Facebook would be irrational not to train their algorithms on every single data point, regulations and opt outs be damned. And that people itt have found that their data says opt in no matter what they pressed in 2016 is believable evidence for that.

As always: Don’t forget what Facebook has done in terms of data leaks, political skew, impact on the pandemic and damage of teenagers on instagram. Do not forget how well they kept this under wraps and how little remorse they have, except in proportion to the fine.

Given the past years, we know that people working at Facebook are literally mustache-twirling cartoon villains, and I wish this was exaggerated.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#138

Post by tailspin2019 »

p49k wrote: post #98
toast0 wrote: post #17

I worked at WhatsApp between 2011 and 2019. This FAQ had very specific instructions for how to opt out of sharing that were only available for a limited amount of time. The FAQ serves as documentation of the product and there's no need to keep online specific instructions that can no longer be followed. In order to opt out, you needed to have an existing account and take specific actions around the time you agreed to…

I specifically and carefully made sure I opted out of this sharing in 2016, and when I requested my data years later, I was marked as "opted in". I don't trust that Facebook honestly honored or correctly tracked this option for anyone.

This matches my experience with Facebook “opt outs”.

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#139

Post by m000 »

DeathArrow wrote: post #104

Instead of arguing how bad WhatsApp is in terms of privacy, people would be better off by switching to more privacy respecting alternatives such as Telegram or Signal. I know it's hard to switch if most of your friends are on WhatsApp, but you can talk to them and switch together.

I had started peddling Signal to my family members. Then Signal shot themselves in the foot by killing the SMS import functionality. SMS integration was the killer feature of Signal for bringing more people on board and get to a critical mass of users, where uninstalling WhatsApp would be a a viable option.

It seems that you can still get the SMS import by first installing an old version that supported it and then upgrading (see [1]). But obviously this is only an option for techies, not moms and pops.

[1] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/8887#issu...

Re: WhatsApp has removed answer to “how do I choose not to share data with FB”

#140

Post by jeltz »

zwaps wrote: post #137
Someone wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not practical for most, but I think you can, by moving to the European Region. Comparing https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/updates/terms-of-service/?lan... to https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/terms-of-service-eea/?lang=en , the EU version removes - “Ways To Improve Our Services. We analyze how you make use of WhatsApp, in order to improve our Services, including helping businesses who use WhatsApp measure the effecti…

It is utterly naive to think that Facebook does not plainly ignore the regulations here. They have done it everywhere else. And once the data is in the model, the Goose is cooked. Who cares about a few million fine? In fact, Facebook would be irrational not to train their algorithms on every single data point, regulations and opt outs be damned. And that people itt have found that their data says opt in no matter wha…

It would be a couple of hundred million fine, but otherwise you are right. The issue with GDPR fines is that while they stop companies from continuing to do the exakt same thing (because they would be fined every year until they stop) it can still be worth the fine if you gain enough market share from violating regulations.
Post reply on HN