O Whatsapp – and its owner, the social network Facebook – remain the protagonists of a true soap opera in the Brazil. The free messaging app has already been blocked three times around here, for failing to comply with court orders and not delivering data to Justice.
Due to the investigations being carried out in secrecy, many “Facebook commentators” and social network users claim that the Justice has requested the Whatsapp the past conversations of criminals. And, due to the end-to-end encryption present in the app, it would be impossible to deliver such data. But not quite…
Justice is not as devoid of technological knowledge as you think. According to a report by the Veja, judges and delegates heard by the magazine state that, “there were several technically possible alternatives to be answered by WhatsApp“. They even claim to understand the impossibility of having access to past conversations today.
As with the wiretapping, where there is already a known process for registering and legally obtaining data for judicial purposes, it may be the case to assess the extent to which a company is right to refuse to provide information to national bodies.
So, what does Justice ask of WhatsApp?
Delegates, prosecutors and judges often ask, for example, to “mirror” messages written by users suspected of crimes. That is, something like allowing access in the style "Web WhatsApp", from the conversations of criminals and suspects, to investigators.
They also request that the phone numberand and/or IPs being investigated, with information and location of these contacts.
Even with the current end-to-end encryption application, the Whatsapp would be able to meet several of the requests presented by the court. And why do delegates, prosecutors and judges want such data? In one of the cases, for example, the objective would be to locate international drug and weapons traffickers, linked to Brazilian gangs. (sociobits.org)
Looking at the two parties, it is easy to see that the creation of end-to-end encryption made it even more difficult for the Whatsapp towards justice. And, yes, he is aware of that, but he remembers that the impossibility of companies to file these records hurts one of the premises of the “Internet Civil Landmarks“, which determines the archiving of this information for at least one year:
Yes, There Are Exaggerations
However, blocking the application, and even its extinction, as the Prosecutor, is not the best way. The impact of these indiscriminate blocks hurts not only the company, but also its users.
The best solution may be to rethink the current punishments, preferring to “touch the pocket” of the Facebook, owner of WhatsApp. As much as the messaging app swears with feet together that it doesn't care about profit, and that it really wants to connect people and has a “social end”, this can be a good proof to understand if the social network would continue with the same discourse , if your billing was affected.
What do you think of this controversy? Are you for or against WhatsApp justice penalties?