News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Correcting the Record on Meta’s Involvement in Nebraska Case. Parent comment

Re:Correcting the Record on Meta’s Involvement in Nebraska Case by skoskie on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @01:02PM (#32415211)
It doesn't matter whether end (you) to end (facebook) encryption is enabled or not. That only protects data "in transit". The information is still accessible in to facebook "at rest". Enabling E2EE should give you absolutely no sense of privacy from Facebook because it doesn't exist.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Correcting the Record on Meta’s Involvement in Nebraska Case by aposm on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @03:31PM (#32417261)
This is contrary to the universally understood meaning of E2EE (as in, end to end between the two participants in the conversation). I'm not one to blindly take Facebook's PR statements at face value, but if you're making the claim that Facebook is deliberately advertising E2EE while secretly redefining the term to mean non-E2EE, you should have some strong evidence. Those sorts of linguistic gotchas don't work in real life or in a courtroom.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Correcting the Record on Meta’s Involvement in Nebraska Case by upbeat_general on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @01:55PM (#32415971)
Is this assuming they build in client-side reporting functionality? In this case it’s not E2EE anyway.

Or are you saying it’s not E2EE unless the clients are auditable?

[ Parent | on HN ]