Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-06-22 12:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:

Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
[...]
>

The point is, whatsapp is closed source, it could be doing other things
beside sending your messages. It could be snooping on other things and
sending that data elsewhere. Meta has now demonstrated it doesn't worry
too much about the law. Do you want that software on your phone? or are
you going to wait for the next thing to be discovered?

>
    I just was in the UK for two weeks and the TV broadcasts are
splattered with commercials from WhatsApp, saying that your messages are
safe and that no-one, including WhatsApp can read them.
>
    Of course, commercials 'lie' all the time, but these would open
WhatsApp to some serious legal action (and fines), so until proven
otherwise, we'll should assume that WhatsApp is *not* lying.

>
I understand they can read them with a court order. Somehow. Maybe it
means they have to impound the phones first.
>
There are some corruption cases in the media now in Spain, and their WA
conversations are being displayed on TV all the time.

    That could well be cases of unencrypted WhatsApp *backup*, on the
*device* (i.e. private unless/until hacked) or/and on the *user*'s
Google Drive (same).
    By default, WhatsApp *backup* is unencrypted, but that doesn't mean
that others - than the 'owner'/user of the chats - or WhatsApp can read
them.