Privacy expectations in discussion groups (not CC)

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Dan B

Disengaged member
It's not 'insecure'. That Guardian story was alarmist bollocks as most of my more technical colleagues in the field agreed (and wrote a long letter explaining why). At least they have had the decency to change the term 'backdoor' to 'vulnerability' but really, compared to just about every other way of communicating, WhatsApp is as good as you'll get without it being practically unusable. The issue that the Guardian wrongly rounded on is not a significant vulnerability.

Some background on this:
http://technosociology.org/?page_id=1687
The proper way to report this story would have been to say: “Here’s a difficult attack that could allow a sophisticated, resourceful adversary willing to invest a good deal of effort, some components of which have never been demonstrated in practice, to read a few messages that had been sent but have not yet been read after events like the intended recipient changing phones or SIM cards. This issue is only of concern during that case: messages sent but not yet read. If you are concerned, you should change this setting on WhatsApp. Beware that even if you change this setting, you will only get the warning after the delayed message is sent. If this is an unacceptable risk to you, switch to Signal if its smaller user base is workable for you and does not pose other threats to you
 
Top Bottom