Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion.

From	"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.mobile.android
Subject	Re: ?Localhost tracking? explained. It could cost Meta 32 billion.
Date	2025-06-22 13:30 +0200
Message-ID	<a36lilxp1d.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <lpp0ilxs16.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <102kjqs$22q4$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <8a71ilxjqj.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <86ikkxncea.fsf@example.com> <1038s51.10ao.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2025-06-22 12:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
> [...]
> 
>> The point is, whatsapp is closed source, it could be doing other things
>> beside sending your messages. It could be snooping on other things and
>> sending that data elsewhere. Meta has now demonstrated it doesn't worry
>> too much about the law. Do you want that software on your phone? or are
>> you going to wait for the next thing to be discovered?
> 
>    I just was in the UK for two weeks and the TV broadcasts are
> splattered with commercials from WhatsApp, saying that your messages are
> safe and that no-one, including WhatsApp can read them.
> 
>    Of course, commercials 'lie' all the time, but these would open
> WhatsApp to some serious legal action (and fines), so until proven
> otherwise, we'll should assume that WhatsApp is *not* lying.

I understand they can read them with a court order. Somehow. Maybe it 
means they have to impound the phones first.

There are some corruption cases in the media now in Spain, and their WA 
conversations are being displayed on TV all the time.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

“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