Doesn't that fly in the face of metas own claims to not be able to?
BI seems to be implying that abortion shouldn't be treated as a crime in places where it is a crime.
Abortion was explicitly legally protected for 50 years and only became a crime in some localities last year. There aren't many "crimes" like that.
In states where it was illegal it may not even be ex-post-facto for them to prosecute for events that took place prior to last year's supreme court ruling.
Anyway, the real takeaway should be that businesses should not be collecting this kind of data in the first place. If they don't collect it, then they have nothing to turn over.
I don't agree with this "technical" interpretation at all. Nobody would have said in 2020 that technically abortion is illegal in many places. Just because the Supreme Court changed its mind doesn't wipe everyone else's minds.
Roe ruled that certain state laws criminalizing abortion could not be enforced. But Roe's ruling was found to be unconstitutional and invalid. It was invalid the day Roe was ruled, not the day it was overruled.
Those same states laws criminalizing abortion, which were on the books before Roe and are still on the books, were always legal and enforceable because Roe never was. That is what the court determined last year.
LOL. What exactly, numerically, does "Plenty" mean, and how does it compare to "all"? Of course, both the majority and minority of the Supreme Court in the Dobbs opinion are legal scholars, but they disagreed vehemently with each other.
Your response sounds very Orwellian to me. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.
We have always been at war with Oceania.
Murdering the unborn was once legal everywhere until it wasn't. It became illegal in some parts of the country and will eventually become illegal everywhere. One day we will look back and think how obvious it is that murdering the unborn is wrong.
A better option would be something like Briar which hides IPs via Tor.
WhatsApp doesn't have an open source client so verification is difficult. However, if someone were able to break the encryption, I'm sure it'd be in the headlines of most newspapers.
One exception is WhatsApp business: I don't know the details, but Facebook offers a service where they will do some chat automation for your business which means they must receive the keys.
In terms of security: key changes are automatically accepted. They are hidden by default, but by toggling a setting every time a user updates their keys, a message will be introduced into the chat. QR code key validation has been in the app for years now, though I doubt many users are using the feature.
If they're not end-to-end encrypted, they're engaging in a lot of deception to indicate that they are.
If you think you need E2EE you can really only achieve that on an open system you control and have intimate knowledge of. You can’t trust precompiled binaries.
Something something trusting trust.
This isn’t a problem technology can solve. Women shouldn’t need to be information security experts just to ask questions about their own bodies.
What does Snowden have to do with Facebook? I'm asking in good faith.
Checking to see if investigations include evidence from messages on these platforms excepting:
Messages sent by the user to someone who distributes them further
Or investigators getting control of the phone.
---
WhatsApp stands up to that test.