Hacker News Reader

Comment by saddlerustle | Hacker News Reader

> The complaint reveals that after Facebook bought WhatsApp, which pledged to its users (and the FTC) strict privacy controls, “Facebook signed an exclusive agreement with Google, granting Google access to millions of Americans’ end-to-end encrypted WhatsApp messages, photos, videos, and audio files.” If true, that’s a remarkable set of illegal acts, by both Google and Facebook, as well as a betrayal of their users.

This has already been debunked as bullshit. What the lawsuit is referring to is just WhatsApp adding the option of backing up your chat history to Google Drive on android devices.

View on HN

It's a nothingburger if all they're doing is just backing up WhatsApp user data. It's not if the terms of the agreement allowed for anything else, which we don't really know because that part of the complaint has been redacted.

it's not nothing if most whatsapp groups contain at least one member that gives an un-ecrypted archive to google. sure it's stated in the fine print, but nontheless most ppl argue that whatsapp is "private because encryption right?"

"What the lawsuit is referring to is just WhatsApp adding the option of backing up your chat history to Google Drive on android devices."

Can you explain how that's any different from "granting Google access to millions of Americans’ end-to-end encrypted WhatsApp messages, photos, videos, and audio files."?

As a disclaimer, I work at Google but have no hidden insights here

I haven't used Whatsapp but I would imagine that exporting your data to Drive is an activity that doesn't happen unless the user initiates it. I find manual backups to be a lot less insidious than the implication that Facebook has built a backdoor for Google that breaks Whatsapp's end to end encryption

True, users have to enable Google Drive backups, but they are tied to the user's phone number and

> WhatsApp backups no longer count against your Google Drive storage quota

So I imagine there is some kind of (paid?) agreement between FB and Google to keep them free.

I don't doubt that the content of the messages stays secret, but there is a lot of metadata that can be inferred by simply tying a phone number and the size of the backup (and deltas) to a user's email.

"I find manual backups to be a lot less insidious than the implication that Facebook has built a backdoor for Google that breaks Whatsapp's end to end encryption"

If the backup process makes it crystal clear to the user that by making the backup Google will be able to read the user's messages, then it's fine.

Otherwise the users might mistakenly think their messages are still private.

Backups are automatic, but opt-in. Unfortunately, you cant opt-out from your contacts saving your shared chat history AFAIK, so even if you dont use backups, there may be an unencrypted copy of your messages anyway.

yep, chances are that most whatsapp groups contain at least one person the uses the google drive backup.

Because it makes a difference if google can read the messages or not.

- if the messages are shared, google has access to private information they were never explicitly granted access to.

- if an encrypted tar ball is shared, google has access to nothing but a blob of unreadable data.

Isn’t this obvious?

Google can read the messages. The backups are not uploaded to Google Drive in encrypted form. The WhatsApp FAQ states clearly:

> Media and messages you back up aren't protected by WhatsApp end-to-end encryption while in Google Drive.

https://faq.whatsapp.com/android/chats/about-google-drive-ba...

While enabling Drive backups is something that the user has to enable manually, I'm not sure the complete consequences of doing so are really communicated to the user. I wouldn't expect Google having an agreement bypass to access my messages even if Drive backup was enabled, but that's exactly what happens, if I understand it correctly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com