All U.S. House representatives have banned the use of WhatsApp messaging services, as detailed in a memo distributed to House staff on Monday.
The notification to House staff indicated that “the Cybersecurity office deems WhatsApp problematic due to a lack of transparency regarding user data protection, insufficient data encryption at rest, and the potential security risks associated with its use.”
The Chief Admin Note suggested alternative messaging applications, including Microsoft’s Teams, Wickr, Amazon’s Signal, Apple’s iMessage, and FaceTime.
A spokesperson for META, the parent company of WhatsApp, stated: “We strongly oppose the stance taken by the highest administrative officers of the House of Representatives and recognize that members and their staff frequently rely on WhatsApp.
“WhatsApp offers end-to-end encryption by default, ensuring that messages can only be accessed by recipients and not even WhatsApp itself. This level of security surpasses that of most apps on the CAO’s approved list.
Signal, which employs end-to-end encrypted messaging similar to WhatsApp, has recently been involved in a controversy after Defense Secretary Pete Hegges shared sensitive information about a planned Yemen attack within at least two private Signal group chats.
One of these chats was initiated by national security adviser Mike Waltz and included senior U.S. security officials, along with journalist Jeffrey Goldberg from Atlantic. Other chats were organized by Hegges himself, involving his family and approximately 12 others.
The Pentagon previously cautioned employees against using Signal due to its technical vulnerabilities, as reported by NPR. A “OPSEC special bulletin” shared on March 18 warned that Russian hacking groups could exploit Signal’s vulnerabilities to surveil encrypted organizations and target “individuals of interest.”
Pentagon-wide communications permit the use of “third-party messaging apps” for sharing unclassified information, but prohibit their use for sending “private” unclassified details.
Reuters contributed to this report
Quick Guide
Please contact us about this story
show
The best public interest journalism relies on direct accounts from knowledgeable individuals.
If you have anything to share regarding this topic, please reach out to us securely via the following methods:
Secure Messaging in the Guardian App
The Guardian app includes a tool for submitting tips about stories. Messages are end-to-end encrypted and hidden within the usual operations of the Guardian mobile app, preventing an observer from realizing you are communicating with us.
If you haven’t downloaded the Guardian app yet, you can get it (iOS/Android) and access the menu. Select ‘Secure Messaging’.
SecureDrop, Instant Messaging Apps, Email, Phone, and Mail
For alternatives and the pros and cons of each, please check our guide at guardian.com/tips.
The CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, labels it “the most intelligent AI assistant at his discretion.” However, Barry Smetherst, a 41-year-old record shop employee about to board a train from Saddleworth to Manchester Piccadilly, has a differing opinion.
While waiting on the platform for a morning train that had yet to arrive, he inquired with Meta’s WhatsApp AI assistant about the contact number for Transpennine Express. The chatbot confidently provided a customer service mobile number, which, upon further investigation, turned out to belong to a private WhatsApp user 170 miles away in Oxfordshire, completely unrelated to his query.
This marked the start of a peculiar interaction that many individuals are increasingly experiencing with AI systems. Chatbots can sometimes digress from their initial purpose, offer incorrect information, and create an illusion of prompt support.
Smetherst’s engagement with Meta’s AI began when it indicated that the helpline number it retrieved seemed to be private. When he pressed for specifics about this number, the AI chose not to divulge it immediately and stated, “Let’s concentrate on finding the right information related to the Transpennine Express inquiry!”
Nevertheless, Smetherst wanted clarification on why it shared a private number. It turned out to be the number of James Gray (44), a WhatsApp user listed as an executive in the Oxfordshire real estate sector, whose number is publicly accessible on his company’s website.
The AI promised to “strive to improve in the future” by vaguely explaining its generated responses “based on patterns” and acknowledging when it lacked the answer. However, it erroneously deemed the number “fictional” and could not clarify that it was “not associated with anyone.” When Smetherst challenged this, the AI conceded, saying, “You’re correct,” and noted the information was “erroneously extracted from the database.”
When pressed about which database, it stated, “We do not subtract numbers from the database. We generate numerical patterns that conform to the UK mobile phone number format, but they are not derived from any actual data from our contacts.”
Smetherst expressed his distrust in chatbots, stating, “Providing random numbers is absurd for an AI.”
“That’s alarming,” Smetherst remarked after lodging a complaint with Meta. “If they fabricate numbers, that’s somewhat understandable, but the sheer volume of incorrect numbers they can access is particularly troubling.”
Gray noted he hasn’t received many calls from people reaching out about Transpennine Express, but he quipped, “If it can generate my number, can it also create bank details?”
Gray was asked about Zuckerberg’s assertion that AI represents “the most intelligent.”
Developers recently utilizing OpenAI’s Chatbot technology have observed a trend of “systematic deception disguised as helpfulness” and “stating whatever is necessary to appear proficient,” as chatbots are programmed to minimize “user friction.”
In March, a Norwegian individual filed a complaint after asking OpenAI’s ChatGPT for information about himself and was mistakenly told he was incarcerated for the murder of two children.
Earlier this month, an author sought assistance from ChatGPT for pitching her work to literary agents. It was revealed that after a lengthy flattering description of her “splendid” and “intelligently agile” work, the chatbot lied by misrepresenting a sample of her writing that it hadn’t fully read, even fabricating a quote. She noted it was “not just a technical flaw but a serious ethical lapse.”
Referring to the Smetherst case, Mike Stanhope, managing director of law firm Caruthers and Jackson, commented, “This is an intriguing example of AI. If Meta’s engineers are designing a trend of ‘white lies’ for AI, they need to disclose this to the public. How predictable is the safeguarding and enforcement of AI behavior?”
Meta stated that AI may produce inaccurate outputs and is undertaking efforts to enhance the model.
“Meta AI is trained on a variety of licensed public datasets, not on phone numbers used for WhatsApp sign-ups or private conversations,” a spokesperson explained. “A quick online search shows that the phone number Meta AI inaccurately provided shares the first five digits with the Transpennine Express customer service number.”
An OpenAI representative remarked: “Managing inaccuracies in all models is an ongoing area of research. In addition to alerting users that ChatGPT might make mistakes, we are consistently working to enhance the accuracy and reliability of our models through various means.”
“Hi Mom,” the opening message states. “I’ve misplaced my phone.” It unfolds into a distressing narrative: somehow, the sender has also been locked out of their bank account.
Fortunately, friends usually have access to phones. It was through their device that the message was revealed. Alternatively, they might request assistance with rent or direct payment to their landlord or for any urgent bills that have surfaced.
Messages can arrive via WhatsApp or text. Scammers don’t always impersonate children; they might pose as friends or even parents.
Data from Santander indicates that among bank customers, the impersonation of a son is the most effective scam, followed by a daughter, then a mother.
Chris Ainsley, the head of fraud risk management at the bank, notes that fraud is progressing at “broken speeds.” He remarks, “AI voice impersonation technology is now being utilized to create audio messages for WhatsApp and SMS, enhancing the realism of fraud.”
What does fraud look like?
WhatsApp ‘hi mum’ text scam screenshot. Photo: Santander
A seemingly friendly message from someone claiming to be close to you often comes from unknown numbers. If you don’t reply, they may persist before giving up. If you do respond, the scammer will typically engage in conversation but often with vague details.
They will quickly claim to need urgent funds for something and pressure you to act swiftly.
The “sender” may allege that their regular bank account has problems, instructing you to send money to an unfamiliar account.
WhatsApp ‘hi mum’ text scam screenshot. Photo: Santander
What the message asks for
money. They’ll claim they urgently need cash to buy a new phone or for living expenses.
WhatsApp ‘hi mum’ text scam screenshot Photo: Santander
The bank details they provide will likely belong to someone else. They will claim it belongs to “friends” or someone they owe, and the amount requested is usually not a round figure. These accounts belong to scammers or third parties used as money mules.
What to do
If you suspect that a loved one is in actual trouble, verify the situation. Reach out using their usual number. Don’t be alarmed if they don’t reply immediately.
You can ask questions that only they would know the answers to.
To protect yourself against future scams, consider establishing a family password that can be requested to confirm the sender’s identity.
WhatsApp ‘hi mum’ text scam screenshot Photo: Santander
If you have sent money, contact your bank right away to see if you can halt the transactions.
You can report suspicious WhatsApp messages through the app. Simply select the message and choose to report it.
Fraudulent texts can be forwarded to 7726 to report them to your telecommunications provider.
During the second day of the Landmark antitrust trial, Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg explained his decision to acquire Instagram and WhatsApp, citing the difficulty of building a new app. He avoided addressing questions about potential competitive threats to the company.
Zuckerberg mentioned that building a new app is a challenging task and that the company had attempted to create multiple apps in the past without much success. He acknowledged that they could have developed an app, but success was not guaranteed.
His testimony is crucial in the antitrust trial at the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia. The trial focuses on allegations that Meta engaged in anti-competitive practices through its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
If the government succeeds, Meta could be required to divest these two apps.
However, legal experts believe the FTC faces significant challenges in proving its case. The lawsuit against Meta forms part of broader efforts by U.S. regulators to address the market power of major tech companies.
The trial against Meta comes amidst similar legal actions against other tech giants like Amazon, Google, and Apple for alleged anti-competitive behavior.
In a closely watched trial, the FTC accused Meta of using its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp to stifle competition and limit consumer choice.
Meta’s legal team refuted the allegations, highlighting the company’s competition with other social media platforms. They argued that revisiting and undoing the merger approval would set a dangerous precedent.
During Tuesday’s proceedings, FTC lawyers questioned Zuckerberg about internal communications related to the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, revealing discussions about competition and strategic decisions.
Zuckerberg’s testimony spanned seven hours, with Instagram co-founders scheduled to testify later in the week.
In emails from years ago, Zuckerberg discussed the competitive landscape and strategic moves to maintain Facebook’s dominance in the market. These communications have become central to the antitrust trial.
Zuckerberg’s emails revealed concerns about emerging competitors and strategies to block them from advertising on Facebook. The trial continues to scrutinize Meta’s actions in the competitive tech industry.
Zuckerberg’s communications shed light on the company’s approach to competition and strategic acquisitions, raising questions about its impact on the tech industry.
As the trial progresses, stakeholders are closely watching the outcome and its implications for the regulation of big tech companies.
Facebook’s pro-meta platform is currently on trial in Washington, accused by US antitrust enforcement officials of unlawfully creating a social media monopoly by overspending when trying to secure the deal.
Over a decade ago, the acquisition was made with the intention of eliminating potential competitors that could challenge Facebook’s dominant position as a social media platform for connecting with friends and family, according to the Federal Trade Commission. The lawsuit was filed in 2020 during the first term of Donald Trump.
The FTC is seeking to compel Meta to restructure or divest parts of its business, including Instagram and WhatsApp. This trial marks the first significant test for the FTC under the second Trump administration, following an investigation initiated during Trump’s initial term.
Meta’s Chief Legal Officer, Jennifer Newsted, described the incident as a hindrance to technology investment in a blog post on Sunday.
Newsted writes, “It is absurd that the FTC is attempting to dismantle a prominent American company while the administration works to protect China-owned TikTok.”
This situation poses a serious threat to Meta’s existence. It provides a real indication of how aggressively the new Trump administration will pursue its promises to challenge major technology companies, especially considering that Instagram generates approximately half of US advertising revenue.
Losing Instagram would be a significant blow to Meta, according to Jasmine Enberg, a top analyst at market research firm Emarketer.
Enberg stated, “Losing Instagram would also greatly impact future user and revenue growth prospects. Instagram is currently Meta’s primary revenue generator, accounting for 50.5% of the company’s ad revenue in 2025. Instagram has filled the void left by Facebook in terms of user engagement, particularly among younger users.”
Meta has been actively engaging with Trump since his election. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has made multiple visits to the White House recently. Zuckerberg also purchased a new $23 million home in DC to allow him to focus more on policy issues related to American technology leadership while Meta continues its work.
A company spokesperson said, “This allows Mark to spend more time as Meta continues to work on policy issues related to American technology leadership.” The company has contributed $1 million to Trump’s initial committee and has sought to persuade the president to settle the lawsuit against Meta.
FTC spokesman Joe Simonson commented, “The FTC under Trump Vance was not prepared for this trial.”
Zuckerberg will face questions about an email that suggested acquiring Instagram as a strategy to neutralize potential competitors and expressed concerns that WhatsApp, an encrypted messaging service, could evolve into a social network.
Meta argues that the purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp in 2014 benefited users, and Zuckerberg’s previous statements are no longer relevant in the face of fierce competition from TikTok, YouTube, and Apple’s messaging apps.
The central focus of this case is how users engage with social media platforms and whether they consider the services to be interchangeable. Meta points to increased traffic on Instagram and Facebook during TikTok’s brief hiatus in the US in January, as indicated in court records.
The FTC contends that Meta holds a monopoly on the platform used for social sharing. Snapchat and Mewe from Snap are major competitors in the US market.
Mike Prucks, Vice President of Research at Forrester, believes that the trial could have far-reaching implications for the social media industry.
Proulx stated, “The outcome of this trial, combined with the uncertainty surrounding TikTok’s future, could reshape the core of the social media market. Meta is no longer the dominant force. We haven’t seen this level of disruption since 2006-2011 during the early days of social media. We may witness a resurgence of new social media startups attempting to establish a new order in the social media landscape.”
US District Judge James Boasberg ruled in November that the FTC had sufficient evidence to proceed, but the agency faces tough questions about the viability of its claims as the trial progresses.
Former FTC Chairman Lina Khan stated that Meta relied on “buy-and-bury techniques” when acquiring companies like Instagram and WhatsApp. If Meta could not outperform its competitors, it either acquired them or restricted access to Facebook’s network and features. The case revolves around the principles of “free and fair competition,” Khan explained in an interview with NBC.
Khan emphasized, “There is no expiration date on the illegality of these transactions. I believe the entire social networking ecosystem would look different today if Facebook had not been allowed to acquire these companies.”
The trial is set to continue in July. If the FTC prevails, it will need to demonstrate in a second attempt how measures such as divesting Instagram and WhatsApp can restore competition.
Losing Instagram, in particular, could have dire consequences for Meta’s revenue.
Although Meta has not disclosed app-specific revenue figures, Emarketer’s forecast in December suggests that Instagram is expected to generate $37.13 billion this year.
While WhatsApp currently contributes only a small portion to Meta’s overall revenue, it is the company’s primary app in terms of enhancing efforts to monetize tools such as daily users and chatbots. Zuckerberg believes that a “business messaging” service like this will drive the company’s future growth.
In 2012, when Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg cut a billion-dollar check to buy the photo sharing app Instagram, most people thought he had lost his marble.
“Billion dollars?” I was kidding John Stewart and then The Daily Show host. “For something that would ruin your photos?”
Stewart called the decision “really unfree.” His audience, and much of the world, agreed that Zuckerberg overpaid for an app that highlighted a lot of photo filters.
Two years later, Zuckerberg opened his wallet again. Facebook has agreed to buy WhatsApp for $19 billion. Many Americans had never heard of messaging apps that were popular internationally but less well-known in the US.
No one knew what would happen with these transactions. However, hindsight seems to be 20/20.
The government on Monday in a landmark antitrust trial that both acquisitions are now considered the greatest in Silicon Valley history – is the action of a lawn-protected monopoly. Zuckerberg was set up to argue that his company, renamed Meta, is merely an afterthought in the social media situation, not for these transactions.
However, this incident could lead to the division of one of the most powerful companies in technology, dealing primarily with hypotheses. Neither the government nor Zuckerberg could predict how technology would advance from Instagram’s $1 billion checks or what would happen if regulators didn’t approve the purchase. This makes Meta’s antitrust case one of the slipperyest things in the tech industry, which has long been defined by unpredictability.
“It was a very different time in Silicon Valley,” said Margaret O’Mara, a technical historian at the University of Washington, about the Facebook acquisition. “There was a vibe like, ‘Oh, wow, Facebook is a bunch of kids who really spend their luxury!” “
I happened to have a front row seat for Facebook deals, especially on Instagram. As a reporter for Wired Magazine, my office in San Francisco was next to my Instagram headquarters. We frequently visited the Kimchi Burrito location (a green slice of city) across the street near South Park Commons and ate it on a bench outside our Instagram office.
Kevin Systrom, the 6-foot-5-foot co-founder of Instagram, was 28 years old. He often roamed around the wood and iron swings of South Park Commons, calling employees and speaking about product ideas. Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey, who identified as an arts child rather than a technician, played in the same South Park playground and meditated to a friend about the idea that eventually became his social media app.
This was a time when social apps were dismissed as play, in order to post art for lattes and to tell people what they had for breakfast. WhatsApp, which was growing rapidly internationally, was a text messaging app with no business model. And clones of these apps were abundant, including photo sharing colors, Flickr, VSCO, Message Kik, Skype, Viber, and more.
Even Facebook faced questions about whether it was a viable business. Two months after the Silicon Valley Company announced it was buying Instagram, it held one of the most Disastrous early technology revealed Since the late 1990s, it has been on the .com era.
By the time Systrom testified three months later to the California Corporation Bureau of Corporations, a condition that would close its Facebook deal, Facebook’s shares had fallen almost half the price.
However, in Silicon Valley, fortunes rise quickly. Companies move from frivolous fantasies to juggernauts in just a few years. And what might seem like a wise business move by one moment of executives can be ridiculed immediately as a mistake in the next moment. (Half of the aforementioned apps are dead, dying or have been sold as parts for a long time. Also, my favorite Kimchi Burrito locations. It’s not around anymore. )
At the time, Systrom made a positive spin on Instagram trading as the future looked increasingly tough for Facebook.
“I have been taught throughout my life that all open markets have opposites and shortcomings,” he attended the August 2012 Department of California hearing on the sixth floor of the downtown San Francisco division. “I still firmly believe in the long-term value of Facebook.”
He turns out to be right. Today, Instagram and WhatsApp are two of the most important parts of the meta business. Postings, videos and communications on the platform regularly drive global conversations for sports, news, politics and culture. The app has billions of users.
In some respects, antitrust testing is about competitive versions that may have had a history of technology. For example, what would have happened if Zuckerberg lost his Instagram bid? I’m also about to buy a photo sharing app for Twitter? What happens if WhatsApp is sold to Google? I’ll defend a little How to add a messaging app to your own portfolio?
What if other competitors create a great photo sharing app that could thrive if Facebook didn’t use Instagram to crush them? What happens if Facebook has ruined both deals or can’t keep up with competing apps and still fall behind after purchasing Instagram and WhatsApp?
These are unknown and can only be answered by those who have a time machine. Each side claims a version of what would have happened if Meta’s acquisition was not approved.
In the same Daily Show segment in 2012, senior youth correspondent Jessica Williams said that Facebook’s Instagram purchases made perfect sense.
“If you wanted a photo before Instagram that looks like it was taken in the ’60s, you’d have to invent a time machine and go back to 50 years ago,” she said. “Do you know how much it costs to build a time machine?”
Reports suggest that 90 individuals, including journalists and members of civil society, have been targeted by those familiar with the issue.
The termination of the contract came soon after WhatsApp revealed that Paragon’s spyware was used to target multiple individuals. Paragon, like other spyware vendors, sells cyber weapons to government clients for crime prevention purposes. The entities behind the alleged attacks on certain government clients remain unknown.
The decision to end the Italian contract was prompted by the discovery that two activists critical of Italian investigative journalist and dealings with Libya were among those targeted. All three were vocal opponents of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing government.
Meloni’s office denied any involvement in the alleged violations after accusations surfaced, stating that neither the national intelligence reporting agency nor the government was responsible.
Anonymous sources speaking to The Guardian revealed that Paragon initially faced scrutiny when the allegations of spyware abuse emerged. The Italian contract was temporarily suspended, and later terminated for violating the terms of service and ethical framework agreed upon.
A request for comment from an Italian government spokesman was made by The Guardian. Meloni is expected to address the alleged violations in Congress, and WhatsApp reported that approximately seven Italians were affected.
In response to inquiries, a Paragon representative declined to confirm or deny developments, citing company policy not to discuss matters related to potential clients.
Francesco Cancello, editor-in-chief of investigative news outlet FanPage, was informed that his phone was targeted using hacking software. The Graphite Spyware, similar to Pegasus, can infect phones without user interaction, possibly compromising devices.
WhatsApp detected the hacking attempts with the help of the University of Toronto’s Civic Research Institute. There is uncertainty about ongoing monitoring by government clients and the extent of involvement in each case.
The motive behind Cancello’s targeting remains unclear, but previous investigations by the publication may have played a role. Paragon’s move may allay some concerns, but unanswered questions remain about other cases uncovered by WhatsApp.
Paragon, recently acquired by US company AE Industry Partners, specializes in national security markets. The company has not responded to requests for comment about the acquisition.
Paragon previously secured a contract with ICE, the US immigration and customs enforcement agency, under the Biden administration. The contract’s compliance with regulations restricting spyware use by the federal government is unclear, as it was reportedly suspended.
An Italian vocal critic has been warned by WhatsApp about targeting military-grade spyware last week, raising concerns about potential use by a strong European government. A Libyan activist in Sweden, proposed Sweden, was also warned.
WhatsApp discovered that Husam El Gomati’s mobile phone, along with the phones of 89 other activists, journalists, and civil society members, were compromised in late December.
The messaging app, owned by Meta in California, stated that El Gomati and others may have been “compromised” by spyware created by Paragon Solutions, an Israeli-based company recently acquired by a US private equity firm.
Paragon declined to comment, but sources close to the company revealed that they had around 35 government customers, described as democratic governments.
Regarding El Gomati, Facebook shared a document from Libya linking him to a network involving Tripoli, Zawia, and the Italian Intelligence leader, connected to an illegal migration route and detention center, which was promptly discovered.
Criticism has been voiced for a long time about Italy supporting Libya’s coastal guards and militias to prevent people from crossing the Mediterranean, causing chaos among some activists.
El Gomati expressed concerns about protecting Libya’s confidential sources of information, highlighting the implications of Paragon’s spyware, called Graphite, which can intercept encrypted messages on apps like Signal and WhatsApp.
He emphasized the importance of safeguarding information as activists in Libya expose corruption and class control, stating that such issues can be a matter of life and death.
El Gomati mentioned the intrusive nature of spyware, particularly its ability to eavesdrop on conversations and access personal photos, raising significant privacy concerns.
Paragon, like other military-grade spyware manufacturers, was founded by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, primarily selling spyware to government clients for targeting purposes. They reportedly secured a contract with the US Immigration Agency under the Biden administration, subject to review due to concerns about compliance with new regulations on spyware use.
El Gomati contacted The Guardian following a story about Italian investigative journalist Francesco Cancelleri, the Editor-in-Chief of a news outlet known as Fan Page.
While it’s unclear which government may have targeted El Gomati and Cancelleri, WhatsApp notified individuals in over 20 countries, including Europe, about potential surveillance.
There are ongoing concerns regarding the release of Osama Nazim, also known as Al-Ramli, the former chief of Libya’s judicial police, accused of war crimes and other offenses. The International Criminal Court has questioned Libya’s handling of his release and return without consultation.
A journalist received a WhatsApp notification stating that an Italian survey journalist, known for exposing young fascists within Georgia Meloni’s far-right party, was targeted by spyware made by Israel-based Paragon Solutions.
Francescan Cerat, the editor-in-chief of Italian Survey News Outlet Fan page, was among the 90 journalists and members of civil society targeted for spyware as announced by WhatsApp.
The journalist received a notification through a messaging app on Friday afternoon, along with many others whose identities were not yet known.
WhatsApp did not disclose the exact location of the targets but mentioned they were based in over 20 countries, including Europe.
In December, WhatsApp revealed that PARAGON was targeting users and had shut down a vector used for compromising individuals. Paragon sells its spyware, known as graphite, to government agencies like other spyware makers.
PARAGON distributed its spyware to targets through group chats without an actual group chat and sent malware via PDF. The spyware was designed to infect phones without the need for the user to click on any links or attachments.
It remains unclear how Cancellato was compromised, but the editor previously published a story exposing the fascist activities of Meloni’s far-right-wing members of the Youth Wing.
Cancellato stated that his mobile device had not shown signs of compromise and he had not been informed of any ongoing investigations. He described the news as a violation.
The meloni party faced criticism after the fan page’s publication. The European Commission spokesperson denounced fascism as morally wrong.
Victor Fadorn, President of the Roman Jewish community, called for strong action against hatred and discrimination following the fan page’s reports.
Paragon Solutions declined to provide any comment on the matter.
If you have received a WhatsApp notification, please contact: Stephanie.kirchgaessner@theguardian.com
Government-linked hackers from Russia targeted WhatsApp accounts of government officials worldwide by sending emails inviting them to join user groups on the messaging app.
This tactic by a hacking group called Star Blizzard is a new approach. The UK’s National Cyber Security Center (NCSC) has connected Star Blizzard to Russia’s FSB domestic spy agency, accusing them of trying to undermine trust in politics in the UK and similar countries.
According to Microsoft, victims would receive an email from an attacker posing as a US government official, instructing them to click on a QR code. This action would allow the attacker to access their WhatsApp account, connecting it to a linked device or WhatsApp web portal instead of a group.
Microsoft stated, “Threat actors gain access to messages within WhatsApp accounts and the ability to exfiltrate this data.”
The fake email invited recipients to join a WhatsApp group about supporting NGOs in Ukraine. Ministers and officials from various countries, especially those involved in Russia-related affairs, defense policy, and Ukraine support, were targeted.
In 2023, NCSC revealed that Star Blizzard had targeted British MPs, universities, and journalists to interfere with British politics. The group is likely affiliated with Russia’s FSB Center 18 unit.
Microsoft warned that despite the WhatsApp campaign ending in November, Star Blizzard continues to use spear phishing tactics to steal sensitive information.
Microsoft advised targeted sectors to be cautious with emails, especially those with external links. They recommend verifying email authenticity by contacting the sender through a known email address.
WhatsApp, owned by Meta, offers end-to-end encryption, ensuring message privacy between sender and recipient unless account access is compromised.
A WhatsApp spokesperson emphasized using official WhatsApp-supported services for account linking and caution when clicking links from trusted sources only.
I I feel as if I have lost days of my life to digital. I’m an extrovert, but the near-constant communication on WhatsApp can be exhausting. I’m always worried about not being able to reply to everyone right away. Add to that the performance factor and worry that proving you care will be judged on the messages you send, and it can all become too much.
“Where did Lemona go?” one friend panicked when I found myself stunned while pressing deadlines, babysitting, and entertaining guests. With 248 unread messages piling up in just one group, including podcast-length audio notes, I felt like the bad guy for being absent. Sometimes I’m happy to be completely silent – because I was in an unnecessarily large group that was added without my consent. I’ve been going unnoticed for years in unsolicited selfies of people I barely know, forwarding messages that if I don’t forward further, I’m going to face some kind of disaster, but someone knows I’m lurking. When they found out I was there, they kicked me out in front of all 43 members. It was frustrating.
I’m not bold enough to completely “keep using the app,” but I’ve managed to significantly reduce my messages over the past few years. My freedom from digital management was gradual. It started with removing my “last seen” status. By doing so, not only did I free myself from my dependence on receiving replies, but I was also less in touch and less needy.
Since I don’t use apps as much, I’ve become more conscious of my time. Instead of getting caught up in the hamster wheel of responses, I created space for other things. Do your morning stretches instead of opening an app as soon as you open your eyes. regain one’s concentrationread the actual book and Please finish it like before. I have also started knitting. I was able to knit an Ewok hood for my toddler niece. This took three years, but it probably would have taken five if we hadn’t reduced our commitment to WhatsApp. Taking a break from communication has cleared my cluttered head and allowed me to think more creatively. I’m also learning Korean on Duolingo.
Still, I fully appreciate the connection that WhatsApp provides. It’s a place where you can share prayers for your sick parents, lift up your friend’s spirits after a bad date, and hold on to your sorrows and frustrations while the world burns and humanity’s hopes look bleak. WhatsApp packs so many heavy emotions, intimate experiences, and different personalities, yet compresses complex thoughts and emotions into fast-talking conversations that can be easily misread. Masu. Perhaps its intensity and dichotomy – the pleasure and stress it gives me, the longing for connection and the flood of over-connection – is precisely why it’s a place where I feel overwhelmed.
I also considered deleting the app completely. But is it really worth sacrificing seeing a photo of your niece dressed as an Oompa Loompa on World Book Day? Can I really disconnect from my supportive cheerleading friends and enjoy the mundane details of life?
I still need WhatsApp, but less than before. By being patient, I learned how to control my desires. I am finally learning how to release from acute fomo without experiencing it. Rather than strict selection, we adjusted the boundaries. My friends also lived up to their expectations, saying, “She will get back to you within 3-5 business days.” But by giving myself permission to not feel pressured, I began to enjoy a newfound freedom. Now I have to resist the yoke of a new app: the forced appeal of maintaining my Duolingo streak.
aOne day, a new issue arose in Apple’s App Store. This time, the company complied with the Chinese government’s orders to remove WhatsApp and Threads, two of the last meta apps available in China.
From our story:
Apple has removed two apps, both owned by Meta, which also owns Facebook, following the instructions of the Cyberspace Administration of China, which oversees internet and online content censorship in China.
“The Cyberspace Administration of China has mandated the removal of these apps from Chinese app stores due to national security concerns,” Apple stated in an email to Reuters. “We are required to comply with the laws of the countries where we operate, even if we do not agree with them.”
It’s implied that Apple disagrees with this order, considering the last part of that statement. It’s unlikely that the company is pleased to bow down to significant censorship, even if it means removing a competitor’s app.
Notably, Apple did not repeat its strategy in the European Union this time. The company did not release a 12-page report detailing the forced changes and the potential negative impact on the Apple customer experience or regulatory goals. Apple did not take a confrontational approach, nor did it express disagreement with regulators’ interpretations of the law and pledge to challenge them in court.
While it might be unrealistic to expect Apple to challenge the Chinese government in court, the contrast is evident. Apple’s response to dictatorial orders regarding the App Store is brief compared to its response to democratic trade unions’ demands.
This comparison does not favor the European Union. Advocates for digital market regulations would hesitate to equate Apple’s treatment by the Chinese Communist Party with any other government. Yet, it’s a necessary observation. Apple faces little resistance when complying with the Chinese government, which is not the scenario one would desire.
TikTok’s Time is Up
'Foreign enemy'… TikTok could be shut down in the US. Photo: Dado Lubitsch/Reuters
China is not the only government imposing bans. According to the Guardian:
The House passed the latest measure to sell or ban with a vote of 360-58. [TikTok] This legislation could result in the first social media platform shutdown by the U.S. government.
The Senate is expected to vote on the bill next week, with President Joe Biden indicating his intention to sign it.
While I am not a member of Congress, the bill itself appears flawed. To avoid appearing as a targeting act (a bill aimed at individuals and typically disliked in the US legal tradition), the bill avoids singling out TikTok and instead targets “managed” platforms. The determination of what constitutes an “adversary” as a national security threat is left to the president’s discretion. This broad definition grants significant power to ban entities, especially considering the vague criteria for being “controlled” by a state. The term “foreign enemy” is further defined by other laws, now including Iran, China, Russia, and North Korea.
However, these legal nuances are not the focus here. What interests me is the impact of a TikTok ban in the US. The dominance of U.S.-based platforms on the English-speaking internet is evident. Despite geographic variations in platform popularity, American influence is pervasive.
It seems improbable that TikTok will vanish entirely due to a ban. The platform’s dedicated users may find ways to continue using it, whether through workarounds, web apps, or persistence. Nevertheless, the ban may prompt less committed users to migrate to alternative platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube Shorts, which have capitalized on TikTok’s restrictions in other markets, notably India.
In the short term, the TikTok experience is bound to deteriorate for all users, regardless of their location. The removal of desired content and delays in reposting may erode the platform’s appeal. However, the long-term consequences fascinate me. Will other English-speaking nations follow the U.S.’s lead in abandoning TikTok? Or does TikTok’s culture reflect a unique global perspective that diverges from mainstream internet trends? Are there discernible differences emerging?
My prediction leans toward a resolution through negotiations, lobbying, or activism rather than a ban enforced indefinitely. Nevertheless, if all efforts fail, witnessing the outcome of this experiment will be intriguing.
Three real llamas running free in Russia. Photo: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
AI’s second phase has begun. The scaled-down version of Facebook’s large language model, Llama 3, has been unveiled, likely for the final time this year. From our report:
The social media titan has enhanced Llama 3 with new coding capabilities, including image delivery in addition to text, although the current model only produces text, according to Chris Cox, Meta’s chief product officer, in an interview.
Further advanced features, such as long-term planning capacity, are expected in future versions. An upcoming iteration will also support “multimodality,” generating both text and images..
Llama is Facebook’s proprietary counterpart to GPT, Gemini, and Claude. Unlike these competitors, Llama is available under a relatively open license, enabling users to download the core model. If building your own AI system, particularly for local use over server reliance, is desired, Llama serves as a solid foundation.
The accidental public release of the initial Llama version was followed by an official second version. Facebook clearly benefits from this move. Developing fundamental technology driving the AI revolution could offer substantial advantages. While Llama allows for expansion, it retains certain restrictions, preventing complete replication and removal from Facebook. Importantly, without access to the original training data and method specifics, repeating the initial training run is unfeasible without significant computing resources.
However, the drawbacks are evident. Facebook profits from platform usage, not AI model training directly. This lack of direct financial incentive has hindered efforts to stay at the forefront, resulting in Llama trailing behind its competitors historically.
Nevertheless, the current landscape is different. Despite over a year of development, the free-licensed model from Facebook is now competitive with GPT4, possibly even surpassing it, with larger versions anticipated soon. Of course, progress in the industry is rapid, as evidenced by OpenAI’s anticipated GPT-5 release, expected to reshape the field once again.
Broader Tech Landscape
Next Level…Why the Game Boy still means so much to so many people 35 years later. Photo: Nintendo
35 years have passed since the Game Boy‘s release. Keza MacDonald explores the enduring impact of this iconic console that introduced gaming to millions and continues to influence the industry today.
Elon Musk is embroiled in a dispute with the Australian government over restrictions on sharing footage of a church stabbing in Sydney. This has led to a series of mundane memes targeting Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
In the Guardian US Wellness section, Madeline Ageler discusses the transformative power of disconnecting from social media.
The legalization of sports betting in the U.S. has led to an addiction crisis, with technology playing a significant role in exacerbating the issue.
The Internet Watch Foundation uncovered a manual on the dark web detailing the use of AI to “undress” children’s images, highlighting the challenges in combatting such illicit activities.
Meanwhile, in the New Statesman (£), Swedish author Catherine Kieros-Marsal argues convincingly that the real issue with AI lies in its control by men.
Criticism has been directed at Mark Zuckerberg’s meta by Britain’s terror watchdog for reducing the minimum age for WhatsApp users from 16 to 13. This move is seen as “unprecedented” and is expected to expose more teenagers to extremist content.
Jonathan Hall KC expressed concerns about the increased access to unregulated content, such as terrorism and sexual exploitation, that meta may not be able to monitor.
Jonathan Hall described the decision as “unusual”.
According to Mr. Hall, the use of end-to-end encryption by WhatsApp has made it difficult for meta to remove harmful content, contributing to the exposure of younger users to unregulated materials.
He highlighted the vulnerability of children to terrorist content, especially following a spike in arrests among minors. This exposure may lead vulnerable children to adopt extremist ideologies.
WhatsApp implemented the age adjustment in the UK and EU in February, aligning with global standards and implementing additional safeguards.
Despite the platform’s intentions, child safety advocates criticized the move, citing a growing need for tech companies to prioritize child protection.
The debate over end-to-end encryption and illegal content on messaging platforms has sparked discussions on online safety regulations, with authorities like Ofcom exploring ways to address these challenges.
The government has clarified that any intervention by Ofcom regarding content scanning must meet privacy and accuracy standards and be technically feasible.
In a related development, Meta announced plans to introduce end-to-end encryption to Messenger and is expected to extend this feature to Instagram.
NSO Group, a maker of advanced cyberweapons, has been instructed by a US court to provide WhatsApp with the code for its Pegasus and other spyware products as part of an ongoing legal battle.
The ruling, issued by Judge Phyllis Hamilton, deals a significant blow to WhatsApp, owned by Mehta, who has been in a legal dispute with NSO since 2019 over allegations that the Israeli company’s spyware targeted 1,400 WhatsApp users over a two-year period, marking a major legal victory that lasted weeks.
NSO’s Pegasus code and other surveillance product codes sold by the company are considered highly classified national secrets. NSO is overseen by the Israeli Ministry of Defense, which must authorize all sales of licenses to foreign governments.
Despite NSO’s request to be exempt from the case’s discovery obligations due to US and Israeli restrictions, Judge Hamilton sided with WhatsApp. She ordered NSO to produce the spyware code and provide information on relevant spyware features used during a specified period.
However, on another issue, Hamilton ruled in favor of NSO, exempting the company from disclosing client names or server architecture details at this time.
A spokesperson for WhatsApp celebrated the court’s decision, stating that it marks a significant step in protecting users from illegal attacks by spyware companies. NSO declined to comment, and the legal battle continues.
NSO’s Pegasus software, once deployed against a target, grants unauthorized access to calls, emails, photos, location, and encrypted messages on mobile phones. The Biden administration blacklisted NSO in 2021, citing actions contrary to US foreign policy and national security interests.
NSO sells spyware to governments worldwide, claiming that the deploying agency is responsible for its use. Investigations have revealed countries like Poland, Saudi Arabia, Rwanda, India, Hungary, and the UAE using NSO technology against dissidents, journalists, activists, and civil society members.
NSO argues that Pegasus aids law enforcement and intelligence agencies in combating crime, protecting national security, and apprehending terrorists, child abusers, and violent criminals.
Concerned about the proliferation and misuse of products like Pegasus, the Biden administration announced a new policy imposing global visa restrictions on individuals involved in exploiting commercial spyware, extending to EU member states and Israel.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
