• BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t believe there’s ever been an instance of E2EE Messenger texts being given to law enforcement, whereas there are plenty of instances where Facebook has provided law enforcement with non-encrypted messages after being served a warrant.

    Believe what you want, but ignoring the legal liability from blatantly lying like that, there’s precisely zero evidence that Messenger’s encryption is compromised.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The encryption doesn’t have to be compromised when their app does the message scanning before encrypting.

      Technically it’s still E2EE

      • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, but at that point, it’s a legitimate question of what goal you’re trying to satisfy with E2EE. This doesn’t prevent metadata analysis being used for marketing purposes - and if that’s something you’re strongly against, that’s perfectly fair - but it does make it completely impossible for message content to be provided to law enforcement, even in the face of a warrant. That is hugely powerful, because we’ve already seen cases of FB Messenger texts being used to go after women who get abortions, just for one example. In countries with truly oppressive governments, that benefit can’t be overstated.

        Sure, Facebook will try to sell you some shit, but they’re not going to send the police to arrest you. Having E2EE is a strict improvement over the status quo, and if you do care deeply about privacy on the more commercial side, there’s always Signal or other privacy-first services.