SUMMARY

  • The EU has identified WhatsApp as a gatekeeper in the messaging industry and has given it a few months to enable interoperability with other apps.
  • The EU’s Digital Markets Act aims to promote fair competition and give consumers more options for alternative services.
  • WhatsApp has already begun working on interoperability with other apps, potentially allowing smaller players like Signal to compete more fairly.
  • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
    261·
    10 months ago

    I can’t wait for signal/session/simplex to be whatsapp compatible, but I’m not sure they can provided the e2ee gurantees since whatsapp is closed source.

    • Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      15·
      10 months ago

      I fear that Signal won’t implement cross compatibility for WhatsApp since they already said that they are not a fan of potentially giving up E2EE to get it to work. And I can understand that but I still really would like to have the cross compatibility.

      • Zak@lemmy.worldEnglish
        21·
        10 months ago

        I hope Signal doesn’t if it won’t be E2EE. I like knowing that if it’s in Signal, it’s E2EE, and being able to tell less technically sophisticated people to whom I recommend Signal that everything in it is secure against eavesdropping.

    • Tomrot@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      10 months ago

      Signal and also lots of other privacy focused messenger-services (threema e.g.) already said the will not implement this forced interoperability since it will lower their already high standards regarding their users privacy. Sad but i guess it makes sense :(

      • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.eeEnglish
        3·
        10 months ago

        So users of those apps will have to install the even less secure apps to converse with “normies”. Great move.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.worldEnglish
      97·
      10 months ago

      I’m not sure they can provided the e2ee gurantees since whatsapp is closed source.

      Uh, news flash: Signal and Meta are business partners and WhatsApp (just as Facebook Messenger) uses Signal’s encryption:

      The ability to sell proprietary versions of Signal libraries is literally the reason for Signal’s Contributor License Agreement: https://signal.org/cla/

      • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
        6·
        10 months ago

        it’s still closed source, so we can’t make guarantees about WhatsApp conversation participants.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.worldEnglish
          73·
          10 months ago

          so we can’t make guarantees about WhatsApp conversation participants.

          “We” can’t but Signal, who work on WhatApp’s source code, can: https://signal.org/blog/there-is-no-whatsapp-backdoor/

          tldr: When contacts have verified each other, communication is secure.

          If you think that Signal can’t be trusted, you should not use their client either.

          • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
            72·
            10 months ago

            signal may have given a fully vetted and correct implementation to whatsapp, but because its closed source we don’t know if it has changed, or if its really implemented on all conversations.

            It changes the trust model of conversation participants.

            To answer your query, if signal was closed source, I wouldn’t trust it either.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.worldEnglish
              63·
              10 months ago

              signal may have given a fully vetted and correct implementation to whatsapp

              They were not “given” it. They are literally the contractor who worked on that: “Over the past year, we’ve been progressively rolling out Signal Protocol support for all WhatsApp communication across all WhatsApp clients.” –https://signal.org/blog/whatsapp-complete/

              but because its closed source we don’t know if it has changed, or if its really implemented on all conversations.

              I’m not an encryption developer. I can’t vet this for Signal’s own app either.

              • jet@hackertalks.comEnglish
                51·
                10 months ago

                …and because its closed source, community cryptography developers and researchers can’t vet it for you either. That is the core issue, its not about trust.

                It’s about capabilities that inform the threat model, and the exposure model.