this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2026
332 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

82581 readers
3716 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Instagram appears to be stepping back from end-to-end encrypted messaging — a surprising move after years of Meta, its parent company, promoting strong encryption as the future of private communication.

A notice on Instagram’s help pages now says end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram will no longer be supported after May 8, 2026. The page instructs affected users to download any chat messages or shared media they want to keep before that date.

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 6 points 2 hours ago

WhatsApp is next. Run while you can.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

Nothing about this is surprising to those paying attention.

[–] LemmyBruceLeeMarvin@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 hours ago
[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 24 points 11 hours ago

How is it surprising that one of the companies that is pushing to force Internet ID laws through state legislatures is removing encryption from their chats?

[–] BagOfHeavyStones@piefed.social 99 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Of course. Can't train the LLM if they can't read them.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 12 points 10 hours ago

Now we can spy openly...

[–] fogrye@lemmy.zip 31 points 12 hours ago

Using any meta’s service is privacy nightmare.

[–] Attacker94@lemmy.world 54 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

I always laugh when I hear about meta's end to end encryption because it isn't remotely true in the sense that people would care about from a privacy standpoint. I know it is the case for messenger, I have not confirmed for other meta services, but in messenger the messages are encrypted in the way you would expect with the one big caveat being that meta stores your private keys on their servers. Iiirc meta explained that it is still e2e because they don't unencrypt it which I find hilarious.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 30 points 13 hours ago

bro, I swear I won't read it bro, you can trust me bro - yo

[–] criticon@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

My understanding is that Whatsapp is "real" e2e and it's based on signal protocol. That app is the main IM in many countries so they'll probably won't mess too much with it

I didn't really expect Instagram or messenger to be really encrypted

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 59 points 14 hours ago (1 children)
[–] artyom@piefed.social 35 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

The shocking thing was that they implemented it in the first place.

[–] jaennaet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

My guess is that they implemented e2ee (or at least they claimed to do it) so people wouldn't be as likely to switch to actually secure messaging platforms. "See here, pleb, our systems are very secure too. You don't want to switch to Signal, and your friends are all here anyhow".

Now they just don't give a shit anymore.

[–] Dojan@pawb.social 32 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

You cannot convince me that it was true end to end encryption. They had an eye in every chat.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 18 points 13 hours ago

well, they can have true E2EE and still be able to read or exfiltrate the messages, because they control both ends...

[–] artyom@piefed.social 8 points 13 hours ago

I wouldn't try to LOL

But there is valid reasoning for it. The metadata is equally as valuable as the actual content. That's why WhatsApp is so profitable. If more people are using it then it could be seen as worth the tradeoff.

[–] warm@kbin.earth 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I think Facebook's "end to end encryption" just means it was encrypted when it got their servers and then encrypted again when it got to the end user.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

That contradicts the very definition of end-to-end, but I would not even be surprised anymore if they spinned that as "fair marketing".

[–] jaennaet@sopuli.xyz 30 points 14 hours ago

a surprising move

Was it, though?

[–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 12 hours ago

im guessing messenger and potentially whatsapp are next

[–] Hiro8811@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Not even WhatsApp has e2e anymore less alone that dumpster

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 12 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

How could they target ads if they can’t read all your private chats?

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

Metadata. They would still know where you were, for how long, who you talk to, when and from where. Then they combine these info. ex: you call your pop and mom, théir fridge broke down, and you start receiving ads for fridges. Was Meta listening?? No: pop and mom hinted the fridge was down (Google search or other), Meta has established your family links a long time ago, and you usually visit them after a longer than usual conversation (as they have an issue and yuu go help). Here: you fridge's ads.

[–] crazyinferno@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Does anyone know if they're unencrypting chats that already happened? Like my chat history? If so that's fucked up

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

They could always do that, and basically anything you can read on your phone, they can access if they need.

Encryption is a math thing: generate a pair of keys: one te encde, one to decode. I broadcast the one to encode ("public key"), and the whole world is tu use it to send me encrypted messages. I keep the decoding ("private key") only for myself.

In client to erver encryption, we exchange keys with the server through which go all the comms: it decodes my messages and re-encodes them for my contact.
In e2e, the key exchange is between contacts: the server does not have the private keys.
In Meta, the proprietary app can send your private key to the server and then they know what you wrote. You have no way to know it doesn't do so!

Opensource audited software is the only way to make sure.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If they can, then it was never e2e encrypted.

[–] Strive7307@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 7 hours ago

Well e2e encryption is never private for the entity contrilling the endpoint. Instagram could push an update which decrypts and uploads your past chat history. Of course they’d only do it for your benefit so you don’t lose any data /s

[–] U7826391786239@piefed.zip 10 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

i'm getting to the point where if someone i don't know that well starts talking to me about some bullshit on instagram, i immediately judge them

edit: it's the same for FB tiktok twitter-- any of those bullshits. i don't fucking care what you saw on fucking facebook, and since you brought it up, moving forward, i care less about anything you say than i would have before