wordpress blog stats
Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

‘We won’t build a backdoor to end-to-end encryption,’ WhatsApp, Facebook to UK, USA, Australia

End-to-End Encryption
End-to-End Encryption

Two months after the British, American and Australian governments wrote an open letter to Facebook asking it to not implement end-to-end encryption across its messaging platforms or build a backdoor to it for law enforcement agencies, Facebook and WhatsApp have replied (available below) and refused to do either. The letter was sent by Will Cathcart, the head of WhatsApp, and Stan Chudnovsky, the head of Messenger.

Why did they send the open letter? On October 4, US Attorney General William Barr, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin K. McAleenan, British Home Secretary Priti Patel, and Australian Home Minister Peter Dutton had written to Facebook asking it to let law enforcement get lawful access to content in a readable and usable format (read: build backdoor) and “not deliberately design their systems to preclude any form of access to content”.

Why don’t Facebook and WhatsApp want to remove encryption? As per the letter,

  1. Chapter in privacy-focused approach: As Facebook is now focusing on privacy, end-to-end encryption has emerged as its friend. The letter also cites another open letter, that has now been signed by over 100 civil society organisations, that supports Facebook’s implementation of end-to-end encryption across its messaging platforms.
  2. First line of defense: Encrypted messaging services form “the first line of defense” against cyber attacks, criminals, and repressive regimes.
  3. Reduces incidents of cyber crimes: Encryption at large “vastly” reduces incidents of serious and common crimes like hacking and identity theft.

Why are the companies against building a backdoor? They argue that building a backdoor to an encrypted messaging service weakens the entire system for “everyone, everywhere”. The backdoor for law enforcement would in fact galvanise criminals, hackers and repressive regimes.

“The ‘backdoor’ access you are demanding for law enforcement would be a gift to criminals, hackers and repressive regimes, creating a way for them to enter our systems and leaving every person on our platforms more vulnerable to real-life harm. It is simply impossible to create such a backdoor for one purpose and not expect others to try and open it.”

In the past too, WhatsApp has categorically refused to build backdoor to its service. In October, when the UK and USA had been negotiating a data access agreement under the CLOUD Act, it had initially been reported that it might force end-to-end encrypted messaging services to build a backdoor to their services. Before MediaNama had clarified that that wouldn’t be the case, Cathcart had commented on Y Combinator, “Backdoors are a horrible idea and any government who suggests them is proposing weakening the security and privacy of everyone.”

Have Facebook and WhatsApp refused to help law enforcement agencies? No, they haven’t. They say that can and do help law enforcement when it is consistent with the law and does not undermine the safety of their users. They gave a few steps that they have taken to help law enforcement agencies:

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
  1. Continue to prioritise emergencies, such as terrorism and child safety
  2. Proactively refer credible threats to law enforcement agencies
  3. In 2018, doubled the number of people working on safety and security to over 35,000. It is not clear if this is only in Facebook, or in Messenger, or in WhatsApp, or across all Facebook subsidiaries. We have reached out to WhatsApp for comment.
  4. Facebook and Instagram AI to take down “bad” content on the platforms.
  5. WhatsApp bans 2 million accounts every months by analyzing abuse patterns, and scans unencrypted information for abusive content.
  6. If someone acts with mala fide intentions on Facebook, action can be taken against them on other Facebook-owned platforms as well, and vice versa.

[embeddoc url=”http://staging.medianama.com/wp-content/uploads/Facebook-Response-to-Barr-Patel-Dutton-Wolf-.pdf” download=”all”]

Written By

Send me tips at aditi@medianama.com. Email for Signal/WhatsApp.

MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.



Looking at the definition of health data, it is difficult to verify whether health IDs are covered by the Bill.


The accession to the Convention brings many advantages, but it could complicate the Brazilian stance at the BRICS and UN levels.


In light of the state's emerging digital healthcare apparatus, how does Clause 12 alter the consent and purpose limitation model?


The collective implication of leaving out ‘proportionality’ from Clause 12 is to provide very wide discretionary powers to the state.


The latest draft is also problematic for companies or service providers that have nothing to with children's data.

You May Also Like


Google has released a Google Travel Trends Report which states that branded budget hotel search queries grew 179% year over year (YOY) in India, in...


135 job openings in over 60 companies are listed at our free Digital and Mobile Job Board: If you’re looking for a job, or...


Rajesh Kumar* doesn’t have many enemies in life. But, Uber, for which he drives a cab everyday, is starting to look like one, he...


By Aroon Deep and Aditya Chunduru You’re reading it here first: Twitter has complied with government requests to censor 52 tweets that mostly criticised...

MediaNama is the premier source of information and analysis on Technology Policy in India. More about MediaNama, and contact information, here.

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ

Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Your email address:*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ