Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #148869
| From | Marion <marion@facts.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.mobile.android |
| Subject | Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. |
| Date | 2025-06-15 03:42 +0000 |
| Organization | BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com) |
| Message-ID | <102lfg1$16fr$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <da80ilxkfh.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <102k0s5$pqa6$1@solani.org> <lpp0ilxs16.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <102kjqs$22q4$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <8a71ilxjqj.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 23:48:24 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote : > That WhatsApp has been affected by this security leak is still unclear. > The author of the article I posted doesn't know. Facebook and Instagram > yes, certainly. But WhatsApp promises encrypted communications are kept > private, end to end encryption. Listening to them would be a major > breach of trust (except with a court order). This is not the same with > Facebook, which is intended to publish things. Thanks Carlos for summarizing as I am also unclear what the privacy implications are. I don't use FB or Instagram but my kids and grandkids use Snapchat and Telegram. Let's hope the courts handle this efficiently. Thanks for keeping us informed as I was blissfully unaware of this issue. I saw Richmond's response just before sending this where the problem is *replacing* WhatsApp where it's not so hard to get my family to use, oh, say, Google Voice, but is that any safer? I use Google Voice but only on the iPad (because Google adds an account on the Android phone if you use GV on Android but Google can't do that on an iOS device - heh heh heh). The problem is the Europeans all use WhatsApp daily. To Richmond's suggestion, how do I get the relatives in Germany to use something else?
Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
“Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 20:47 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-13 20:34 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 23:07 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-13 23:11 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-14 01:03 -0500
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-14 14:59 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-06-14 09:08 -0500
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 16:28 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-06-14 16:14 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-06-14 17:01 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 19:35 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 19:29 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-06-15 00:34 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-14 19:55 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 22:28 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-14 23:41 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 16:27 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-14 19:57 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-14 19:50 +0000
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-14 23:48 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-06-15 00:15 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2025-06-15 09:05 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-17 01:40 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-06-18 11:43 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-18 14:19 +0200
Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-06-22 10:15 +0000
Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-22 13:30 +0200
Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-06-22 19:20 +0000
Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-22 21:40 +0200
Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-06-22 23:17 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-15 03:42 +0000
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-17 02:00 +0200
Re: ⤽Localhost trackingâ€? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Joerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de> - 2025-06-15 11:45 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-06-14 20:51 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 22:34 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-06-14 21:45 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-06-15 03:46 +0000
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-06-15 09:49 +0100
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-14 22:29 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-14 23:43 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-06-15 07:10 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-06-17 01:51 +0200
Re: “Localhost tracking” explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-06-15 00:32 +0200
csiph-web