Full access to Entrepreneur for $5
Subscribe

WhatsApp reads the messages of its users and provides information to the courts, according to a report

According to a report by ProRepublica, the platform has more than a thousand people employed for this task.

By
This article was translated from our Spanish edition. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Big Brother? As reported by ProRepublica , WhatsApp employs more than a thousand people to monitor the messages that are reported on the platform. According to the information, these workers "make judgments about anything that appears on their screen ... from fraud or spam to child pornography and possible terrorist conspiracies, usually in less than a minute."

Depositphotos.com

Does WhatsApp read or not read our messages?

It is assumed that the application, owned by Facebook, does not have access to the information that one user sends to another, because it is end-to-end encrypted, that is, it is encoded to be unreadable until it reaches its recipient.

In this sense, the news platform clarified that WhatsApp does not break the encryption, but that the workers who monitor the writings only have access to those messages that users point out and automatically forward to the company with possibly abusive content.

“The review is one element in a broader monitoring operation where the company also reviews material that is not encrypted, including data about the sender and their account,” explains ProRepublica .

However, the media emphasizes that this can pass as a contradiction since the narrative of Facebook Inc., about the security of the messages of this instant messaging platform is that they are not read or do not have access to the content that circulates in it.

For his part, in his response to the portal, the WhatsApp communications director, Carl Woog, acknowledged that there is this staff in charge of “eliminating the worst abusers” and emphasized to ProRepublica that the company does not consider this to be a regulation of content.

What do you think?