WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK law, says chief

Re:WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK la... by yosser on Thursday March 09, 2023 @11:43AM (#35083262)

Isn't this a red herrring? I thought the law didn't require the removal of E2E encryption, but rather mandated the addition of a back door that submits some kind of meta data summary to a third party service?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK la... by developer93 on Thursday March 09, 2023 @12:02PM (#35083515)

Is that better? The effect is the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK la... by spoiler on Thursday March 09, 2023 @12:08PM (#35083580)

I think they meant to say that this is just a PR stunt by saying they won't remove encryption (because they don't even need to to comply)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK la... by 29083011397778 on Thursday March 09, 2023 @12:12PM (#35083622)

That depends entirely upon who gets to define "End-to-end", and whether they are held to task for any inaccuracies in that definition

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK la... by FalconSensei on Thursday March 09, 2023 @03:00PM (#35085864)

is it truly E2E encryption if it has a backdoor?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WhatsApp would not remove end-to-end encryption for UK la... by m463 on Thursday March 09, 2023 @04:42PM (#35087134)

whatsapp has that.

[ Parent | on HN ]