WhatsApp at BlackBerry? For one thing, BBM's now free BlackBerry has abandoned the freemium model it tried to build around its pioneering chat client BBM, and is making all of its goodies available for free, including secure encrypted chat. The company previously charged a subscription for being able to retract and delete messages after a period of time, giving users three of …
This post has been deleted by its author
Facebook snaffles your contacts book whether you agree to it or not
You sure about that? If that was true then it would mean Facebook are using an exploit to subvert the permissions the operating system gives to apps. In which case, I'd expect it to have blown up all over the internet and both Apple and Google engineers scrambling to fix it PDQ.
Or did you mean the less exciting (but possibly more accurate) "Facebook snaffles your contacts book as a condition of using it"?
iOS lets you set permissions for whether an app can access your contacts list, so it isn't possible for Facebook to do that. It will ask for permission when you first install the app, but if you say no it will still run. It never snaffled by contacts list.
However, it obviously has done that with some of my friends, because I recall seeing something where it asked me "is your phone is xxx-xxx-xxxx" (which it was) and offering to set me up with the ability to text me if I forget my password. The first time it did that I was a little off put wondering how they figured out my number, but it was pretty obvious in hindsight that unless every one of my Facebook friends who has my number in their contacts refused permission for Facebook to access them that's how they got it. If it was only one friend they might not know if I was the same one, but when they have multiple people having the same number for it is pretty obvious.
So really I suppose it doesn't matter if I let Facebook at my contacts, as anyone in my contacts list who is on Facebook has almost certainly had their number slurped from one of their other friends anyway!
@Silver
There are two possibilities:
1. you work for facebook inc
2. you are an idiot
I do not quite know why, but I sense you are 2. STFU, you have no clue.
Exactly what permissions does the app request ? Hint: I commented on it some time ago ...
The app DOES NOT WORK, EVEN ON BB10, if you refuse access to contacts ... again, STFU!
The app DOES NOT WORK, EVEN ON BB10, if you refuse access to contacts ... again, STFU!
There is a massive difference between "the app doesn't work if you don't allow it access to your contacts" (which is what you and I have both suggested is that case) and "the app slurps all your contacts whether you agree to it or not" (which is what The Reg has written).
If you're going to call someone an idiot, it would be helpful if you understood the distinction.
... I never gave Facebook any rights to store my number and other details from any of my contacts.
In many jurisdictions the data you gather from other people - including telephone numbers - can't be sent to third parties without the owner *explicit* consent. Actually Facebook should ask WhatsApp users to ask each and every of their contacts if the agree to send their data to Facebook. The simple OK from the WhatsApp user is not enough because his or she is managing third party data for which they have no explicit consent to be transferred to third parties.
"The simple OK from the WhatsApp user is not enough because his or she is managing third party data for which they have no explicit consent to be transferred to third parties."
It's a nice idea, but I'm pretty sure it's wrong. The fact that the phone number belongs to you does not make it 3rd Party information. Your friends entered your phone number into their phone, the information belongs to them. A users contact list is considered first party information because it belongs to the user - the fact that the information is a list of phone numbers, geographical addresses, email addresses, birthdays, contact specific notes and pictures - that don't belong to the user is irrelevant.
No, in some jurisdiction it's exactly how it works - feel free to read privacy laws. They are personal data and you can use them for the purpose they were given to you only. Someone I gave my number can call me, but can't give my number to a third party without my permission - which, by the way, has always been the correct and polite way to handle someone else data.
Only data in *public* records (i.e. public phonebooks) may be used without explicit permissions. And while individuals may be exempt from many legal procedures in handling third party data, they are usually not exempt from the need to protect them, and the associated liability.
Facebook & C. would like you to think you lose ownership of data you give someone for specific use (look also how FB, Google & C would like to cripple copyright....), becuase their whole business is built on someone else data. Just the law in many countries say something else.
Facebook slurping, like Google's and Microsoft's, is on a very dangerous line. "Safe harbour" has been already struck down because it didn't comply with EU personal data protection rules. Let's wait for a Schrems with enough time to look into those data slurping capabilities, including data of third parties who never signed any agreement with FB or the like to use their data.
Moreover, remember that while FB & friends gather automatically as much as data they can from your devices, usually in their TOS you accept that any liability for any damages or illegal contents - including third parties that may sue - is upon you alone.
Thereby be very careful about what you let FB & other leeches access...
Yes. (The old clients still connect, and pidgin works fine, I generally set it up on any multi client I use.)
Several months ago I mentioned in a forum that I'd not used it for several years, and of course within 24 hours I'd had 2 unrelated conversations using it. (I have an 8 digit user name, which is old)
Blackberry moved too slowly. If they'd made BBM available on iOS and Android five years ago, they could become established there back when people were looking for messaging alternatives that saved money. They didn't want to hurt their market for phones so they waited until everyone was on an unlimited SMS plan and alternatives like iMessage, WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger had become established.
It was obvious people wouldn't be willing to pay for BBM when they were so late, so now they are offering it for free. And this benefits them how? Unless they can use the platform to deliver ads it costs them money but doesn't result in any revenue current or future. Unless they think people will become addicted to BBM and like it so much they'll buy Blackberry phones. Good luck with that!
If they'd switched to Android instead of doing BB10, and included BBM as a free exclusive there and paid product on iOS and Android, they might have a chance of still being around three years from now.
Yes, BBM would have to do something that Whatsapp and Viber are not doing to get any market share. I know that it is more secure, but most people don't really care as long as much as how convenient the app is.
Perhaps they could integrate unblockable Firechat style messaging directly between phones and over local Wifi LANs and mesh networks to help people in autocratic places like Egypt and Hong Kong?
@All the Clueless
1. Facebook bought Whatsapp
2. Whatsapp requires access to your contacts AND SMS'
The facebook app might not have access to your contacts, on BB10, at least (dunno about overs and do not care), but Whatsapp REFUSES to work on BB10 if you do not grant it access to your contacts, which I refused .... I could not use the app, because I could not contact or be contacted by anybody ... I do not grant apps access to my contacts, I am not a cretin! So ... billions of cretins around here feed facebook with valuable information facebook monetizes ... d'oh!!!!!!!
The way I look at it, anyone who gives a rat's hindquarters about privacy has always been an idiot to use WhatsApp, because WhatsApp's user identities are directly tied to each person's phone number (like SMS), which means that (AFAIK) you are broadcasting your telephone number to the whole world whenever you use it. Furthermore, anyone who uses anything owned by FB and expects their privacy to be respected is an idiot of the highest degree.
Ergo, people of that persuasion who are miffed about sharing their contacts list with the FacePlex seem sort of quaint.
@AndrewOrlowski - in the article you claim:
"...making all of its goodies available for free, including secure encrypted chat."
Are you saying that BlackBerry Ltd is now offering BBM Protected for free? This would be news to me.
BBM has been encrypting its chats on the wire with real encryption (as opposed to the traditional BBM "scrambling") ever since they built BBM on BB10 and went cross-platform. But data-at-rest encryption, or the other additional BBM Protected layers of security, have always required some sort of subscription.
Have they really done away with that now?
I just discovered that BBM is now offering "private chat" for free, which used to be part of their add-on privacy subscription. (Along with message retraction/editing, photo retraction, etc)
Private chat is a snapchat-like service where when you enter such a chat your username becomes invisible, history is not retained, timestamps are not visible, and screenshots are blocked or send a notification to the other party.
Perhaps Andrew mistook that for BBM Protected?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
