They're almost certainly not using the same version as the general public. Most major service providers have a specific version for government with additional controls and restrictions and have undergone certification through FedRAMP, including Microsoft: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/government Some other examples: - AWS GovCloud https://aws.amazon.com/govcloud-us/ - Google Workspace for Government h…
Or in some cases, different (but overall worse) controls to meet FedRAMP requirements, and much less security monitoring or active testing than the commercial environment.
I can't imagine any justification for any government device that should be secure to have anything on it but the bare minimum software and the device in whatever hardened mode it has. If they visit the White House, government facility ... should go in a locker. I worked for a company that sent people onsite to government contractors. One contractor we rarely visited was at a facility where you arrived at the front ga…
> "high-risk to users due to the lack of transparency in how it protects user data..."
> "We disagree with the House Chief Administrative Officer's characterization in the strongest possible terms."
It seems like this is non-responsive to the first claim. Meta goes on to say that WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, but the quotes never really do address the transparency issue.
Government: Zuck put a backdoor in WhatsApp or we will put you in a blacksite UFC ring and beat you up. Also Government: WhatsApp has a backdoor. Don't use it.
WhatsApp is always end-to-end encrypted, Teams only in certain cases.
If you think end-to-end encryption is the only thing that matters in security, then yeah sure, WhatsApp is more secure. Personally, I'd be embarrassed to let people know I thought that way, but to each their own.
Serious question: who else takes for granted that Zuck gets a daily summary of all high-level federal governmental communications, as harvested via backdoors or simply from non-end-to-end encrypted traffic on any Meta property? I assume he does. I assume moreover that most people aware of this at Meta consider this due diligence in defending shareholder value. What's that line from Dune 2, a wise hunter climbs the ta…
What would Meta get out of spying on their own government? That's a "life in secret jail" kind of risk for a sickeningly rich CEO with a private island. We haven't even found any evidence of backdoors used against foreign governments, they'd be pretty stupid to attack the American government. Plus, when it comes to important communications, the weird, hacked, Israeli Signal fork already has access to these documents…
It isn't without risk, but when is the last time a US billionaire faced real legal repercussions for anything? US law is 90% based upon being able to outspend your opposition, and if you lose despite outspending them, it mostly involves paying some money, which they already have plenty of by the fact that they outspent their opponent. Even if you are fighting the US government, they government isn't willing to spend endless amounts of money for prosecution. Only if you can't afford the legal costs to keep trying will you face jail time, like the poor.
WhatsApp also feels... tonally weird to use at a serious company, like in the same way it would feel weird to be using snapchat for team meetings.
WhatsApp is already the de facto communication channel in a lot of countries. In Brazil even subpoenas can be sent via WhatsApp.
Yeah it's the de facto communication method for personal communication. I have never worked at a company where people use WhatsApp to communicate. It's always Slack or Teams or Mattermost.
I can't imagine any justification for any government device that should be secure to have anything on it but the bare minimum software and the device in whatever hardened mode it has. If they visit the White House, government facility ... should go in a locker. I worked for a company that sent people onsite to government contractors. One contractor we rarely visited was at a facility where you arrived at the front ga…
Thank goodness somebody takes security seriously. The cynic in me (opposed in strongest terms by the realist and give-a-damn in me) says: Whitehouse? Go for it. You'll probably leave more stupid (confused) than you went in.
Signal would be the obvious choice here - open source, no AI integration, minimal metadata collection, and recommended by security professionals for sensitive communications.
Signal lacks other compliance features. e.g. message archiving It might be good if you're a journalist, but it's not as good if you have compliance requirements beyond confidentiality.
Wouldn't this be pretty easy to roll your own? You could set up different servers like Molly does. Or you could just recompile the app. Or you could force link it to a desktop session? Just spitballing here