As valuable as the metadata is to Facebook, it can be equally as costly and dangerous to the businesses whose people use WhatsApp.
Secure text messaging apps free#
Many businesses recognize the drawbacks of free solutions including WhatsApp and Signal and do not want their employees communicating on these platforms because they do not want Facebook and other services to obtain their metadata. At the end of the day, businesses require communications that are completely secure, easy to use, and provide great sound quality. While these free solutions may work to some extent for consumer users, where they really fall short is within businesses, large and small alike. The user and their metadata are “the product.” Consumer Products Fall Short for Business Users
With enough metadata of this type, Facebook can profile WhatsApp users virtually in the same way as they could by reading the texts or listening to the calls in the first place. The reason Facebook paid $19 Billion for WhatsApp is that WhatsApp delivers tremendous value to Facebook about who is using it, where they are, with whom they are communicating, for how long and more. In other words, they compromise on privacy in ways that are less obvious, but nonetheless invasive. “Free” with an Expensive Price TagĪn additional concern with these and other similar free solutions is the fact that while they are “free,” they come with a hidden, expensive price tag the collection, aggregation, analysis (and sometimes selling) of user metadata. Research indicates that if sound quality is poor people will stop using the solution, typically within a day or two. Their calling feature is lacking and phone calls are of poor quality and difficult to hear. However, one of the areas in which they fall short is in encrypted voice calls. The reality is that while Signal and WhatsApp provide encrypted messaging, and their encrypted messaging is better than native text messaging (SMS) standard on phones today. Encrypting text messages and not phone calls is akin to “locking the door, but leaving the window open.” The Times fails to make this important recommendation. Protecting voice calls is as important as securing text messages. The principal form of mobile communications is making a phone call, actually speaking with someone. This recommendation intrigued me, because securing text messages is just a partial step. The first recommendation is to send encrypted text messages using Signal or WhatsApp. And, as the article appears in the “Personal Tech” section, it does not address the needs of business people. The Time’s recommendations are helpful, but they are first steps, and even then, some are incomplete.
Protecting our digital assets is an important conversation that does not get enough coverage and I commend the NY Times for their initiative in helping to educate people about cyber threats and basic security measures. Recently, I enjoyed an article in the NY Times titled, “ Protecting Your Digital Life in 8 Easy Steps.” It was an excellent “How to” article for the consumer, providing simple tips on protecting digital content.