Mandatory WhatsApp Privacy Policy Update Allows User Data To be Shared With Facebook (macrumors.com) 102
WhatsApp's latest terms and privacy policy allows the popular messaging app to share a significant amount of user data with Facebook. From a report: WhatsApp users are today receiving an in-app notice informing them about the app's updated terms of service and privacy policy. The notice gives an overview of the main three updates, covering how WhatsApp processes user data, how businesses can use Facebook-hosted services to store and manage their WhatsApp chats, and how WhatsApp will soon partner with Facebook to offer deeper integrations across all of the parent company's products. The changes, which are set to take effect on February 8, 2021, are mandatory and users will not be able to continue using WhatsApp unless they accept the terms.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:No surprise here (Score:4, Interesting)
Only because Apple is forcing data sharing into the light so the cockroaches are being forced to scurry.
Re:No surprise here (Score:5, Interesting)
More like Facebook is rushing to integrate their products as a defense against the company being broken up.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The products are already integrated; they're just going public about it.
Re:No surprise here (Score:4, Interesting)
They tried to do years ago right after the purchase, but stopped when the EU reminded them it was not only in itself illegal, but specifically against the deal they made with the EU to allow facebook to purchase whatsapp. I seems they need to be reminded again.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Messages are encrypted end-to-end. If FB has a backdoor, it hasn't come to light.
Re: (Score:2)
Messages are encrypted end to end, and facebook has the keys. This is not a secret, and therefore "came to light" long ago.
Hint: when you start a new chat with someone, to handle end to end encryption, you must exchange keys with that someone. So they can decrypt your messages and you can decrypt theirs. The reason why you don't have to create such keys and separately send them to the other person is because whatsapp handles distribution of said keys.
I.e. when your keys are created, they are given to facebo
Re: whatsapp must be popular (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is one of those self evident things where burden of evidence is that "this self evident thing isn't actually being done". They have the keys, because they generate the keys and they handle key exchange. You'd need evidence that they for some reason delete all copies of their keys in their entirety.
Which facebook obviously don't even claim, much less provide evidence for. They simply state that there's end to end encryption protecting communications from man in the middle attacks.
Re:whatsapp must be popular (Score:4, Insightful)
I have mod points. I wanted to up use one on the parent - but I could not find and set a status "horrified".
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Here in Germany, it is essentially required for all social interactions. Nobody communicates through anything OTHER than WhatsApp, even going so far as some business contact numbers routing through WhatsApp. I hate it, but I haven't yet figured out how to get around it.
The only workaround I can see is to encourage all your friends to move to signal [signal.org]. This is maybe easier than similar cases in the past because people who still need WhatsApp can have both messengers installed. Signal is run by a nonprofit so there's more chance that it will remain private longer term.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: whatsapp must be popular (Score:3, Funny)
Why would I use those legacy unencrypted protocols for communication?
Re: whatsapp must be popular (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Err....phone (voice) calls and text through Whatsapp???
Why would you do that?
Why not use a cell phones inherent basic functionality and CALL through the regular phone and text regularly through the phones natural means.
No need for an extra app, especially one owned by FB....
I don't get it.
Re:whatsapp must be popular (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where I live, data is also usually more limited than voice so I don't really think it about it when I need to talk to someone. I just call.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i am often in a location, because of work or my hobbies, where cellular is the only connection. free wifi doesn't exist 5 miles offshore or out in the bush.
Your situation is unusual then, OP clearly lives and works in a city, as most people around the world do. The point is that on wifi, I can call anyone anywhere in the world for free using wifi. Other times I can use my plan minutes, but it is ridiculously expensive to call some other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought pretty much all plans were now unlimited in data and voice?
It's pretty much just a commodity now, no?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.simyo.es/tarifas-m... [simyo.es]
As a note, Simyo.de redirects to blau.de, but it's easy enough to have a contract in another country...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
WhatsApp supports way more media than just text and whatever your particular brand of MMS might work with. It also has groups. It also has a store-forward mechanism, which means messages don't get lost if the receiver doesn't have a connection at the time I send.
In other words, it's technically superior and has a way better set of features.
Re: (Score:3)
Err....phone (voice) calls and text through Whatsapp???
Why would you do that?
Why not use a cell phones inherent basic functionality and CALL through the regular phone and text regularly through the phones natural means.
Pre-COVID I was doing a lot of international travel, one or more trips per month to India, South Africa, and other locations. I've noticed in India in particular, WhatsApp tends to be used in place of a more traditional cell phone call as the VoIP functions tend to be more reliable than cell phone signals, even in larger cities. Often, even inside the same office building people will use WhatsApp to call each other.
Re: whatsapp must be popular (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
I use those messengers mostly on the desktop or in a browser on Linux, the signal app is horrible and the threema web interface is even worse.
The best compromise I've found is telegram which has an awesome standalone desktop client available on all major platforms, and yes I'm aware the unencrypted stuff resides on their servers (where else?) but that's exactly what I mean by "best compromise". It's a godsend for sharing files, group communication and as of latest, video calls as well.
About 95% of my contac
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There is also Viber [viber.com] which I've found to be popular in Europe as an alternative to WhatsApp. I've been using it for years and like it.
Unfortunately it's easier to say to encourage people to change from WhatsApp to another app but they are comfortable with it and everyone else they know is using it. Asking them to change means having them using two apps, one to chat with you, and one to chat with everyone else they know.
Re: (Score:2)
Ugh, I thought that was a third-world thing.
Whatsapp is popular for basically the same reason Windows is, first-mover advantage. They offered the first multi-OS chat app that allowed a phone number to be used as a username, basically.
Re: whatsapp must be popular (Score:2)
everyone has text messaging don't they?
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't work so well with group chats
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Germany, it is essentially required for all social interactions. Nobody communicates through anything OTHER than WhatsApp, even going so far as some business contact numbers routing through WhatsApp. I hate it, but I haven't yet figured out how to get around it.
If everyone is communicating through WhatsApp, that says a lot about what they do NOT want to communicate through.
As in shit like Facebook.
You may not have to wait to "figure out" a solution here. Public opinion may force that hand rather quickly.
Re: (Score:1)
I wonder how this will be thought of by the authorities. Germany is hot on data protection, particularly in the area of sharing of data where it isn't required (no Facebook account, Facebook has no right to the data).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:whatsapp must be popular (Score:5, Interesting)
So yes, there were a lot of compelling reasons to use WhatsApp, and now that it has such an enormous momentum, it will be hard to get rid of it. For many people it's the primary tool for messaging friends. Though many of my friends are already on Signal these days, and I find myself using WhatsApp only for a handful of contacts these days. I'll be dropping it come February.
Reasons: See FlappyBird. (Score:2)
Says my Murphy's Law dictionary.
Re: whatsapp must be popular (Score:2)
Well, for one it was encrypted and secure before FB bought it
Secondly it makes great phone calls overseas, crystal clear most of the time.
For some reasons most Americans still use FB messenger for what everyone else uses WhatsApp for, even tho it sucks in comparison
They don't already? (Score:3)
I'm forced to use Whatsapp because of work, and never really bothered reading the t&cs. The only surprise to me about this is that they aren't sharing everything anyway (with Facebook, and anyone else with a big enough cheque book). In fact, like the other posters I'd go as far as saying this has been happening and the only change is they are telling us.
Re: (Score:2)
I"m curious...what sort of job requires you to use a chat app like WhatsApp?
That seems a strange job requirement. Do they at least give you a company phone to run it on?
Re:They don't already? (Score:4, Informative)
Not the parent, but some businesses, especially small businesses, just use whatever random small app they find gets the job done, and sometimes it's just decided by whatever the business owner is familiar with.
I'm actually surprised sometimes how much companies are willing to share data with other companies because how easy it is for them to use the services. 20 years ago you would have never seen so many software companies allowing someone else access to their source code, but now you see tons of software companies willingly uploading their code to GitHub/Microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually surprised sometimes how much companies are willing to share data with other companies because how easy it is for them to use the services. 20 years ago you would have never seen so many software companies allowing someone else access to their source code, but now you see tons of software companies willingly uploading their code to GitHub/Microsoft.
One thing has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.
OSS is completely orthogonal to putting someone else in charge of data you don't intend to share.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not talking about open source software, but rather companies who have closed source software and upload it private repositories on GitHub.
Re: They don't already? (Score:2)
Oh yeah, i forgot that was a thing.
That IS a bit bananas.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, if the business owner decided they don't mind FB spying on them, then they probably have no problem with FB spying on their employees. After all, it's not an additional cost they have to bear.
Re: (Score:3)
Its not actually a requirement, but I run a company that's part of a small franchise network and there's a Whatsapp group for technician chat (beer line cleaning, so business wise we have nothing to do with computers or coding - in fact most are as un-techy as it gets).
So maybe 'forced' was the wrong word, but the group is very handy for real-time technical chat and problem solving, which can be important on jobbing work when there are hourly deadlines alongside random issues. Refusing to use it would just
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is in fact a very common way to use it. On a similar note, even people like emergency workers will often do quick co-ordination via WhatsApp group chats. I.e. "accident happened, how do we get everyone relevant in the same chat room in a minute so we can co-ordinate as efficiently as possible". Everyone knows some of the workers on the scene, but not all. So everyone has rights to add someone to the group, and in a few minutes, everyone relevant is in the room exchanging time critical information.
It's
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds about right. Its just a shame it has to be proprietary. In the old days it would have been a protocol (remember RFCs - maybe they still exist, but its not something I hear anymore) and everyone would be welcome to build their own front ends. I mean, after all, the only thing that really makes them easier to use than older legacy systems is that its tied to your phone number, which is info that even old non-techies have stored in their contact lists and understand.
Personally I think that rather than
Re: (Score:2)
Telegram is open source I believe. There's even an open source client for it on f-droid.
Re: (Score:2)
Its not the status of the source code though, its the status of the protocol that matters. You should be able to use Telegram, Whatsapp, emacs, whatever, to connect to the open chat protocol - the client shouldn't matter (beyond whatever bells and whistles they want to add). I know that's not going to happen, but that principle is what allowed the internet to exist and grow in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Again, you can do this. In fact, there are clients who do this.
They're utterly unsuccessful because that makes for a horrible user experience. Having a one clean, working protocol and one clean, predictable client across all user machines is the way to go because you want extreme predictability when it comes to communication.
And when everyone has exactly same capabilities and limitations, and when those capabilities and limitations fit overwhelming majority of people, you get a successful messenger software
Re: (Score:2)
Again, you can do this. In fact, there are clients who do this.
How can there be clients that do this already do this when there is no standard protocol? Sure there are other chat clients, but they also use their own proprietary protocols. I can't use Signal to talk to Whatsapp.
They're utterly unsuccessful because that makes for a horrible user experience. Having a one clean, working protocol and one clean, predictable client across all user machines is the way to go because you want extreme predictability when it comes to communication.
So explain the success of email? Anyone can build an email client or server and as along as they follow the standards for messaging they can make the client as useable as they want. You can use command line for email if you want, or you can use one of many GUI based clients, it makes no differenc
Re: (Score:2)
>How can there be clients that do this already do this when there is no standard protocol?
There are countless standard protocols.
>So explain the success of email?
Far better than snail mail, the thing it replaced. Same reason email is increasingly less and less relevant for younger people. Example from above with first responders applies here. You can't lift bodies off the floor reliably when your fifty. Even in your fourties, it's going to be hard. But people in twenties and thirties who are in good p
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure one of my first comments stated it was a utopian dream, so we maybe don't disagree too much :).
I just think an attempt at interoperability could be a better option than say breaking up Facebook, since that just breaks the smell up into smaller chunks. It can be done in a number of ways. For example, you mentioned AIM so you might also remember the FCC forced interoperability on AIM back in the day, as a condition of its merger with Time Warner. That helped kill AOL as the default IM service. Where
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine we probably agree on most things. At least from what I've seen so far. I just think you overestimate the value of openness to both public and service providers.
And as it comes to "end of open internet" honestly, this depends on what you mean by open internet. If by that you mean free access to knowledge, that is likely ending. Between how China successfully closed pats of its internet to outsiders, and how so much communication moved to social media which now actively moderates normal interactions
Re: (Score:2)
Some pubs here in the UK started using it this past summer to reduce the number of people going to the bar to order, table service being uncommon. Worked really well.
[16:15, 31/07/2020] me: Hi - could we have the following for table âoepatio 1â: large glass Pinot Grigio, glass fresh orange juice with ice and a straw, and a pint of Black Sheep
[16:18, 31/07/2020] Old Lodge bar: Thank you be with you shortly
[16:48, 31/07/2020] me: Could I have another Black Sheep please?
[16:53, 31/07/2020] Old Lodge
Re: (Score:2)
[23:56, 31/07/2020] a luv youz, gis a pint an a dubble whizky
Re:They don't already? (Score:4, Interesting)
I use it to communicate globally with people and with with auto-translate built in, it allows me to connect with people and serve their needs in their language.
Haven't found:
1) An app more in use by regular people that:
2) Allows for auto-translate on the fly.
So for me at least, it's about reaching people in a way they find comfortable communicating in to resolve technical issues remotely.
Yo Grark
Re: They don't already? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
App-store rule change? (Score:2)
Time to seriously consider Signal? (Score:1)
This new policy should ease advocacy in favor of alternatives...
The only logical response... (Score:2)
is to switch to Signal. Anything that becomes part of the FB ecosystem can automatically be assumed to be snooping on you. I'm sure that the WhatsApp founders are horrified at the change in the TOS. After all, they did introduce encryption as a core part of the application from the get go.
I think that Apple, and to a lesser extent the government, have forced the hand of Facebook. They are now in a desperate scramble to hoover up any and all private data before either being broken up or otherwise forced to c
Mandatory? (Score:3)
Uh you can always choose to ditch WhatsApp.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Mandatory? (Score:2)
So the rest of the world has to bend to accommodate you?
I wonder what Facebook is thinking (Score:5, Interesting)
The EU recently changed rules to make it easier to regulate social media companies and some of the behavior they are looking is tying services together and the EU and USA are already looking to breaking up Facebook and forcing it to divest operations.
It seems like Facebook is doing the exact thing that has regulators worried the most and will just be used against them in an antitrust case.
I expect that Facebook will be regulated in the EU or forced to divest the EU part of their company and the services split up to smaller companies. In the USA it also looks like Facebook is facing a major antitrust challenge.
All of this is caused by Facebooks own behavior. They don't show up to testify, just pay fines instead of turning over data to courts etc. They act like they are above the law and that is just a dumb movie. In the EU at least the regulators are not talking about breaking up YouTube just requiring them to be a bit better at removing certain types of content once they are notified the content is not allowed.
Re: (Score:2)
...They don't show up to testify, just pay fines instead of turning over data to courts etc. They act like they are above the law and that is just a dumb movie.
Uh, "act" like?
I'd say they're doing it. And doing it very successfully.
And don't assume they don't have the political clout to continue paying slap-on-the-wrist fines to continue business as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
The new fines (passed a few weeks ago) are now based on worldwide global gross revenue in order to go after these huge companies. The next fine they face is not going to be small.
The EU seems to be tiring of Facebook rapidly.
It's good we're getting this in the open?! (Score:1)
The best part of this change is that almost nobody will change their behavior. Soon every company will detail their horrible data sharing arrangements and find out that users, even if they care, won't change behavior. As a friends mom said when we explained how a coupon app was abusing them, "But I want the coupons. How else do I get them if I don't allow the app?"
Signal supports group video chat now. (Score:2)
Even stickers are available.
Just throwing that out there.
Don't follow every meme/FlappyBird/Zoom out there. If you are a business and use WhatsApp, you might aswell just sell you business to Facebook. Everything you say and do will be used against you, make no mistake.
And this proves their encryption was always just security theater. Signal can't share your data, even if they wanted.
Whatsapp? (Score:2)
Sounds like iMessage for Android.
Alternatives (Score:2)
Can I get some Slashdot-favored alternatives that are well-suited for "normal" folks?
My wife is wanting something that she can recommend to a group of about twelve, mostly tech-illiterate grandmothers that adopted WhatsApp at her suggestion back before it was/they were aware it was connected to Facebook. The group has become increasingly distrustful of the app in the last few years, with one lady already departing due to the app's connection to Facebook. I suspect that with the right nudge they'll jump ship
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
My wife and I have been using Telegram for close to eight years now (I think). She uses with her mother is who is almost 80, and we use it with quite a few folks who are not technologically savy. Telegram does have groups. Telegram is quite easy to use.
Re: (Score:2)
Signal its the better option, privacy wise. But mostly tech-illiterate people prolly like Telegram more.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a fan of how flexible Discord is. Good for everything from one-on-one to thousands of people.
Chat works like any other and you can drop pictures in-line. But you can move to voice chat with a click, and video chat with another click.
For larger groups it's nice to be able to have dedicated topical channels. With one group of friends one of them is deployed overseas, and we've got his deployment adventures (mostly airport delays and quarantines) in their own channel. That lets the rest of us keep the bant
Re: (Score:2)
Signal, Telegram, and Viber are all good choices. My favourite is Viber [viber.com] as I find that it's easiest to use but that can be a personal thing. I've found that Viber tends to be popular in Europe but not many other places. I would recommend checking it out at least to compare it with the others.