this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
818 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

79355 readers
4180 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As evidence, the lawsuit cites unnamed "courageous whistleblowers" who allege that WhatsApp and Meta employees can request to view a user's messages through a simple process, thus bypassing the app's end-to-end encryption. "A worker need only send a 'task' (i.e., request via Meta's internal system) to a Meta engineer with an explanation that they need access to WhatsApp messages for their job," the lawsuit claims. "The Meta engineering team will then grant access -- often without any scrutiny at all -- and the worker's workstation will then have a new window or widget available that can pull up any WhatsApp user's messages based on the user's User ID number, which is unique to a user but identical across all Meta products."

"Once the Meta worker has this access, they can read users' messages by opening the widget; no separate decryption step is required," the 51-page complaint adds. "The WhatsApp messages appear in widgets commingled with widgets containing messages from unencrypted sources. Messages appear almost as soon as they are communicated -- essentially, in real-time. Moreover, access is unlimited in temporal scope, with Meta workers able to access messages from the time users first activated their accounts, including those messages users believe they have deleted." The lawsuit does not provide any technical details to back up the rather sensational claims.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 16 minutes ago

You gatta be real stupid to not realize that Facebook is harvesting your data.

[–] roserose56@lemmy.zip 11 points 2 hours ago

No surprised at all tbf.

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I never used WhatsApp, but what made people think they used e2e? I'm way passed blindly believing what any company says they do without proof. I'd expect some kind of key or certificate management in the app, is that present?

Heck.. my default is still to think every website does plaintext password storage. I can't prove it, but neither can they. Stop storing my passwords in plaintext lemmy! /s

Around a year ago WhatsApp had large ads that just said "no one else can read your messages." I don't think most people thought that some one could, which makes me wonder why they were paying so much to say it.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 22 points 5 hours ago

Proposed line of defense: "With all respect, M. Judge, with all the different times we fucked our users, lied to them, tricked them, experimented on them, ignored them, we already sold private discussions on Facebook in the past, our CEO and founder most famous quote is «They trust me, dumbfucks!», the list goes on and on: no one in their sane mind would genuinely believe we were not spying on Whatsapp! They try to play dumb, they could not possibly believe we were being fair and honest THIS time?!"

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 38 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

15 years ago I’d have called this a conspiracy theory given how the evidence seems to be anecdotal, but given literally every single other thing we’ve learned in recent times about how cartoonishly evil and lying the tech bros truly are, it seems entirely likely.

[–] Delilah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 46 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Wait, you are telling me that the company whos entire business is collecting personal information, including people who don't sign up for their services, to leverage for advertising, is keeping their platforms unsecured they can continually grab more information rather than secure it?

I for one am shocked, absolutely shocked.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 10 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, except they’re not leveraging your data for advertising, they’re leveraging it so they can manipulate your political views and keep you from finding solidarity with other working people.

[–] dogzilla@masto.deluma.biz 4 points 4 hours ago

@FlyingCircus @technology These two things are the same thing

[–] pinesolcario@lemy.lol 12 points 7 hours ago
[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 84 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Well if I can't trust Meta with my information, who CAN I trust

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 1 points 33 minutes ago

The drunk dude that's always sitting on the ground near the park entrance and sell weird tissue dolls with curly hairs is more trustworthy, I'd say.

[–] chemicalprophet@slrpnk.net 40 points 10 hours ago (4 children)
[–] usernameusername@sh.itjust.works 32 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Oh okay. My location is 55.752121, 37.617664, my full name is Jeremy, and my password is hunter9. I trust you not to tell this to anybody

[–] rmuk@feddit.uk 26 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Your full name is "Jeremy"?

[–] usernameusername@sh.itjust.works 21 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Oh god damnit chemicalprofet why did you tell this guy i thougjt i could trust you :((

[–] bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

All I see is '••••••'

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 2 points 1 hour ago

I see '******' though.
Maybe it's just a different interface.

[–] EdgeOfDistraction@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

Just like Cher (which is short for Cheremy).

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 19 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Your secret is safe with us and our 36,893 affiliates.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mudkip@lemdro.id 4 points 7 hours ago

It was obvious.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 42 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

It is end to end encrypted but they can just pull the decrypted message from the app. This has been assumed for years, since they said they could parse messages for advertising purposes.

[–] Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 hours ago

Hasn't it always been that they can decrypt the backups that you personally setup in wa, this way they don't legally lie to you when the app tells you "this chat is encrypted, even Whatsapp cannot read the messages".

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›