this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
176 points (96.3% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
647 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lol no it's not. Meta can and WILL decrypt it. They have decrypted messages for police requests numerous times, and not necessarily under court order, just police asking. I support decryption under court order, but these weren't court ordered. Thinking anything owned by Meta is secure is ridiculous.
Then this is false advertising and a class-action lawsuit that should have already happened.
This Arstechnica article seems to confirm that they can't decrypt without user intervention and that they have only ever supplied metadata to law enforcement. I'm no fan of Meta but do you have sources that they have in fact decrypted actual message content at the request of law enforcement?