• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    16 months ago

    End to end doesn’t necessarily mean that the middle can’t read it, it just means strangers listening can’t read it.

    I thought it meant nobody between the two ends can read it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      End->(public network)->WhatsApp->(public network)->End

      So, no stranger can read it.

      The key word is stranger. WhatsApp made the encryption you’re using and could (and I’m sure does) have the ability to decrypt it.

      True end to end is where you and your partner have keys and you both encrypt on the client side, and don’t tell the middle man. That way no malicious intent from the server could ever decrypt the actual message.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        06 months ago

        True end to end is where you and your partner have keys and you both encrypt on the client side, and don’t tell the middle man. That way no malicious intent from the server could ever decrypt the actual message.

        That’s how the Signal protocol they’re using is working

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                16 months ago

                You seem confused. E2EE doesn’t mean peer-to-peer. Signal protocol isn’t peer-to-peer. You don’t need to be peer-to-peer to have secure communication because E2EE makes it so that the server can’t read what the two ends are writing.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  16 months ago

                  Can you prove to me that WhatsApp actually encrypts the message on the phone in such a way that WhatsApp can’t see the message when it’s on their server?

                  Do you truly believe a company owned by Meta would provide that kind of security from THEM? A company whose income is profiting on DATA supplied by users?

                  Tell me you believe this.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    16 months ago

                    We know they certainly implemented it at one point. So it’s not a big ask to do that for Messenger. And like someone said, would probably benefit them too since don’t have to give info they don’t have. But with it being closed source, it can’t be verified if they’re using it now.