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

Technology

79355 readers
4201 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The "exploit being used" is closed-source, proprietary code sending data where it says it doesn't.

People have already explained to you how signal's open-source, auditable, and reproducible code prevents the possibility of a similar exploit.

You're the smug fool who doesn't understand cybersecurity. How much is zuck paying you to say "signal's just as bad as whatapp"?

[โ€“] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world -1 points 19 hours ago

Nobody is saying signal is just as bad, simply that it's not invulnerable to this kind of attack, even with reproducible builds, especially as we don't know how the attack works.

When is the last time you checked the linked-devices tab in signal?