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

Setting the record straight

blog.whatsapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 45 posts

Re: Setting the record straight

#11

Post by mirkules »

jvdh wrote: post #3

Respect for your privacy is coded into our DNA, and we built WhatsApp around the goal of knowing as little about you as possible: You don’t have to give us your name and we don’t ask for your email address. We don’t know your birthday. We don’t know your home address. We don’t know where you work. We don’t know your likes, what you search for on the internet or collect your GPS location. None of that data has ever be…

Sometimes it is more important what a post like this doesn't say.

"You don’t have to give us your name and we don’t ask for your email address. We don’t know your birthday. We don’t know your home address. We don’t know where you work. We don’t know your likes, what you search for on the internet or collect your GPS location. None of that data has ever been collected and stored by WhatsApp, and we really have no plans to change that."

Great: they don't take my PII - but a person can easily be de-anonymized with just meta-data.

In addition, nowhere does it say "we won't read your messages" or "we won't sell your conversations". I think they are interested in much more than just meta-data. If I were Facebook, I would be licking my chops at the prospect of access to the mountain of saved private conversations.

Re: Setting the record straight

#12

Post by mikro2nd »

jvdh wrote: post #3

Respect for your privacy is coded into our DNA, and we built WhatsApp around the goal of knowing as little about you as possible: You don’t have to give us your name and we don’t ask for your email address. We don’t know your birthday. We don’t know your home address. We don’t know where you work. We don’t know your likes, what you search for on the internet or collect your GPS location. None of that data has ever be…

I think the key part is

  scaring people into thinking we’re suddenly collecting all kinds of new data
I don't suppose many people outside of the Tinfoil Helmet Brigade doubt this right now, but what of the future? When the piper (fb) comes piping (and that could be a year or three away) what tune will they dance to?

Re: Setting the record straight

#13

Post by camillomiller »

Facebook will use whatsapp for whatever purpose they see fit. A 19 billion acquisition is not a partnership. When that will happen deliberately, maybe a year from now, the founders will leave, maybe slamming the doors, and enjoy their riches for the years to come.

Re: Setting the record straight

#14

Post by droopyEyelids »

camillomiller wrote: post #13

Facebook will use whatsapp for whatever purpose they see fit. A 19 billion acquisition is not a partnership. When that will happen deliberately, maybe a year from now, the founders will leave, maybe slamming the doors, and enjoy their riches for the years to come.

Does anyone know the founders' employment history before Whatsapp? Have any of them been a part of a buyout or merger before?

I empathize with Jan & I think he believes what he has written, but does he think Facebook bought them for no reason at all? If he wants us to take him seriously he should explain how Whatsapp intends to make money for Facebook. Even implementing OTR won't totally protect users' privacy, so long as a megacorp is capable of performing traffic analysis.

Re: Setting the record straight

#18

Post by RyanZAG »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #14
camillomiller wrote: post #13

Facebook will use whatsapp for whatever purpose they see fit. A 19 billion acquisition is not a partnership. When that will happen deliberately, maybe a year from now, the founders will leave, maybe slamming the doors, and enjoy their riches for the years to come.

Does anyone know the founders' employment history before Whatsapp? Have any of them been a part of a buyout or merger before? I empathize with Jan & I think he believes what he has written, but does he think Facebook bought them for no reason at all? If he wants us to take him seriously he should explain how Whatsapp intends to make money for Facebook. Even implementing OTR won't totally protect users' privacy, so lo…

No, they previously worked for Yahoo.

Re: Setting the record straight

#19

Post by ck768 »

This may sound naive, but I genuinely believe that Whatsapp cares about user privacy and that they won't silently mine our data and send it to Facebook. That would amount to sheer hypocrisy, and could also come under legal scrutiny. I also think that Zuckerberg, at some level, really does want to connect the world and all that, and Whatsapp is a much better bet than Facebook is, for developing countries. That being said, Whatsapp does need to improve their security, and irrespective of the facts, this is proving to be a bit of PR disaster for them, with a mass exodus of users to Telegram. (They'd do well to nick some features from Telegram).

Re: Setting the record straight

#20

Post by mattlutze »

mirkules wrote: post #11
jvdh wrote: post #3

Respect for your privacy is coded into our DNA, and we built WhatsApp around the goal of knowing as little about you as possible: You don’t have to give us your name and we don’t ask for your email address. We don’t know your birthday. We don’t know your home address. We don’t know where you work. We don’t know your likes, what you search for on the internet or collect your GPS location. None of that data has ever be…

Sometimes it is more important what a post like this doesn't say. "You don’t have to give us your name and we don’t ask for your email address. We don’t know your birthday. We don’t know your home address. We don’t know where you work. We don’t know your likes, what you search for on the internet or collect your GPS location. None of that data has ever been collected and stored by WhatsApp, and we really have no plan…

This jumped out at me as well.

In his list, they don't-not collect A. my phone number, and B. my entire message history. Certainly he knows that our phone number is PII enough.

It's trivial for someone with the means to tie a cell number back to a person, and only slightly less trivial to look at timestamps and cross-reference tower locations and messages to have a quality bit of intel.

If he was truly about this "we're not the Stasi" bit, I'd imagine we'd see some measure of assurance they don't store messages.

But, then again I don't know that the service would have been worth 19B USD without those.

Post reply on HN