According to software engineer and blogger, Paul Biggar, however, one key detail on the methods employed by the Lavender system that is often overlooked is the involvement of the messaging platform, WhatsApp. A major determining factor of the system’s identification is simply if an individual is in a WhatsApp group containing another suspected militant.
Aside from the inaccuracy of the method and the moral question of targeting Palestinians based on shared WhatsApp groups or social media connections, there is also notably the doubt it brings to the platform being privacy-based and guaranteeing “end-to-end” encryption for messages.
Stating that WhatsApp’s parent company, Meta, makes it complicit in Israel’s killing of “pre-crime” suspects in Gaza, Biggar accused the company of directly violating international humanitarian law, as well as its own public commitment to human rights.
These revelations are the latest evidence of Meta – formerly Facebook – aiding in the suppression of Palestinian and pro-Palestinian voices, with the platform long having been criticised for taking significant steps to shut down dissent against Israeli and Zionist narratives. Those measures have included permitting adverts promoting a holocaust against Palestinians and even attempting to flag the word ‘Zionist’ as hate speech.
Questioning the accuracy of the report, a WhatsApp spokesperson told MEMO: “We have no information that these reports are accurate. WhatsApp has no backdoors and we do not provide bulk information to any government. For over a decade, Meta has provided consistent transparency reports and those include the limited circumstances when WhatsApp information has been requested. Our principles are firm – we carefully review, validate and respond to law enforcement requests based on applicable law and consistent with internationally recognized standards, including human rights.
“Easier” is what got us to where we’re at today in terms of our privacy, and even our security. These companies are betting precisely on us being lazy and choosing easy. Let that comment sink in for a few seconds.
You are absolutely right of course, I was a bit sarcastic in the comment above. I firmly belive that the pursuit of a more convenient live will be our downfall - in terms of privacy, but also e.g. in terms of traffic (cars are very convenient but shouldn’t be the future for the masses).
I do love my car, and it pains me to no end to have to agree with you. We’re on the wrong road believing that electric cars will have any significant positive impact on pollution. Sure, if we all charged from renewable energy, but that’s very rarely the case.
We have electric cars in my house, 2 of them, I and we charge solely from solar energy when at home, but out on the road, I don’t believe that to be the case.
Then there’s traffic and how cities are built around it, instead of the other way around.
Yeah, we’re fucked.
Same here, I really like driving, it can be fun and (sometimes) relaxing and there is no better place to sing along to some songs.
At the same time I try to avoid driving as much as possible, I take the bike, walk, take the train, no matter the weather. I don’t want to be one of those cars sitting at the red light, using up space, polluting the environment and giving our local parties the idea, that we need that one more lane.
Some things are more important than a few convenient minutes.