Iran Urges Citizens to Delete WhatsApp Over Alleged Data Leak to Israel
Iranian state media suggested that WhatsApp, which is among the most widely used apps in the country, might be contributing to security breaches by 'gathering user information' and transmitting it to Israel. However, these assertions were made without presenting concrete evidence.
Meta Platforms, the parent company of WhatsApp, swiftly denied the accusations. In an official statement, the company described the claims as 'false reports' and voiced concerns that such allegations could be used as a pretext to restrict access to its services.
'We are concerned these false reports will be an excuse for our services to be blocked at a time when people need them the most,' Meta stated.
WhatsApp emphasized that its platform is secured with end-to-end encryption, a technology designed to ensure that only the sender and recipient of a message can access its content.
'We do not track your precise location, we don't keep logs of who everyone is messaging, and we do not track the personal messages people are sending one another,' the company clarified. 'We do not provide bulk information to any government.'
Despite the assurances, some cybersecurity experts remain cautious. Gregory Falco, a cybersecurity researcher and assistant professor at Cornell University, highlighted that metadata—such as message timestamps and contact patterns—could still be vulnerable to leaks, even with encryption in place.
The backdrop of these allegations includes longstanding concerns over the cooperation between global tech firms and military organizations. While companies like Google and Microsoft have previously worked with the Israeli government in non-military capacities, suspicions persist. Compounding the issue is the history of Israeli firms like NSO Group, known for the controversial Pegasus spyware, which has exploited platforms like WhatsApp for surveillance purposes.
WhatsApp had previously taken legal action against NSO Group in a U.S. court, underscoring its opposition to such surveillance activities.
The Iranian government's warning has sparked intense debate over digital privacy, data security, and the role of global tech platforms in geopolitical conflicts.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
37 minutes ago
- Mint
Income tax scam calls: How to detect and report in FY 2024-25
As the tax season for FY 2024-25 continues to gain momentum, taxpayers are getting increasingly targeted by scamsters impersonating income tax and RBI officers. This is done through emails, calls, text messages, and even WhatsApp video calls. Falling prey to such scams can result in serious financial reverses and compromised data. These risks make vigilance vital for all taxpayers. Scamsters use threats of legal action, intimidating messages, and fabricated credentials to exploit innocent taxpayers to extract sensitive information, while they go ahead with filing taxes for FY 2024-25. Hence, all taxpayers should keep these points in mind while going ahead with their income tax submissions: Official communication from the income tax department always carries a unique DIN, i.e., Document Identification Number. Any text message, notice, or email without a DIN is a clear warning sign and can likely be fake. That is why you should always go through the origin of such messages carefully and never entertain them. Proper income tax notices and communications are uploaded to your official e-filing portal. You can obtain complete details on the same by logging into your income tax account through the official website. If a text message, email, or call urges immediate action without any official record, you should treat it with caution. Never panic in such situations and verify it before proceeding with the official channels of communication. Legitimate emails only originate from '@ Do keep in mind, scammers and fraudsters often mimic and copy these domains. That is why always verify every sender's address, name, and objective behind the email before replying. Income notices generally never cause panic. They give responders time to respond. The income tax department never requests taxpayers for personal or confidential details such as credit card PINs, passwords, OTPs, or bank information through calls or emails. If you are faced with any pressure tactic to extract such information, it is a scam. If you ever feel that the call or message received by you is fraudulent, then you should take immediate action to protect yourself from financial reverses and report the scam properly. You should also ensure that you report such events so that the rights of other taxpayers can also be defended. You can reach out to the national cybercrime reporting portal at or dial the helpline 1930 to report any cybercrime. You can also file a complaint at your local police station, providing call details and any evidence. To report fraudulent refund emails, calls, or messages, you can send an email to webmanager@ attaching relevant communication and FIR copy if possible. Reach out to your bank if financial information has been shared, and monitor transactions closely. Inform your telecom provider to assist in blocking or tracking scam numbers. To stay alert and safe while dealing with such scams, you should: Never lose your composure and calmness. Never respond to unverified calls seeking personal or financial details. Verify tax messages by logging into the official income tax portal. Share awareness with your friends and family to curb such scams. Continue to build knowledge of new ways through which such crimes are planned. For all personal finance updates, visit here. Disclaimer: Mint has a tie-up with fintechs for providing credit; you will need to share your information if you apply. These tie-ups do not influence our editorial content. This article only intends to educate and spread awareness about credit needs like loans, credit cards, and credit scores. Mint does not promote or encourage taking credit, as it comes with a set of risks, such as high interest rates, hidden charges, etc. We advise investors to discuss with certified experts before taking any credit.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Can Mark Zuckerberg duck deposition in Meta privacy class action?
Mark Zuckerberg has better things to do than sit for a deposition. Or so lawyers for Meta Platforms suggest in a pending petition to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, objecting to the billionaire CEO being forced to give testimony in a proposed privacy class action. The company invokes a controversial principle known as the apex doctrine to claim Zuckerberg should be spared the hot seat, arguing that he has no "unique" knowledge of the case, and plaintiffs' lawyers could get the same information from lower-level Meta employees. Plaintiffs want to question the CEO about allegations that Meta obtained private health information from millions of Facebook users without their knowledge or consent via its Pixel tracking tool. The claims echo those in a class action by users of fertility tracking app Flo Health, where a San Francisco jury on August 1 found Meta violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act. Damages are yet to be determined, but as I previously noted, the total could be huge. In June, U.S. District Judge William Orrick in San Francisco agreed with U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi and gave the plaintiffs a green light to depose Zuckerberg. However, the judge limited the session to a maximum of three hours and narrowed the scope of allowable questions to center on a consent decree Meta entered into with the Federal Trade Commission involving the Flo app and Zuckerberg's role as a final decisionmaker on privacy-related matters. Live Events A Meta spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. The company in court papers has denied wrongdoing in both cases. Plaintiffs' lawyers from Gibbs Mura declined to comment for this column. Defense counsel from Latham & Watkins and Gibson Dunn & Crutcher in July asked the 9th Circuit for a writ of mandamus to nix the deposition, calling it "a critically important issue of first impression" for the San Francisco-based court. Mandamus is a "drastic and extraordinary" request, plaintiffs' lawyers say, arguing that the trial court judge in allowing the deposition committed no clear error to justify such relief. But defense counsel say there's a larger issue at stake than a one-off deposition. Multi-billion-dollar companies like Meta face scores of lawsuits, and their leaders have "uniquely crucial and demanding job duties, as well as limited time," they wrote. That makes being called to testify especially burdensome. District courts within the sprawling 9th Circuit are "deeply divided" on exactly when and how to properly apply the apex doctrine, Meta lawyers said in asking for appellate guidance. Indeed, spats over deposing CEOs have arisen regularly in court within the 9th Circuit and beyond in cases involving companies including Microsoft, Tesla, Uber, and Alphabet. In some instances, execs were let off the hook, while others were compelled to sit for depositions. Such demands can be more about harassment than a legitimate need for information, the Meta lawyers claim, arguing that deposition testimony is only justified if the executive has unique, first-hand knowledge that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Here, they assert, the bid to depose Zuckerberg is "a ploy to increase the burdens of this litigation and obtain perceived leverage." Plaintiffs' lawyers counter that state and federal procedural rules already allow subpoenaed witnesses to contest demands for their testimony. There should be "no special dispensation from civil discovery for corporate executives simply because of their status as titans of industry," wrote lawyers from Gibbs Mura; Simmons Hanly Conroy; Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll; Kiesel Law; and Terrell Marshall Law Group. The underlying litigation began in 2022, when plaintiffs alleged Meta violated a federal wiretap law and a California privacy law, as well as its own contractual promises governing user privacy on Facebook, my Reuters colleague Jonathan Stempel reported. According to the complaint, Meta Pixel -- an internet analytics tool that Meta makes available to website developers -- provided sensitive information about users' health to Meta when they logged into patient portals where it had been installed, enabling Meta to make money from targeted advertising. Meta in court papers has responded that it should not be held liable if certain healthcare providers allegedly misused Pixel, "a publicly available tool that Meta did not implement or configure on the providers' websites." Plaintiffs' lawyers, in justifying their request to question Zuckerberg, argue that from the start he's been implicated in the case. "He had personal knowledge of Meta's intent to receive this information," they allege, "and he knew about and played a key role in Meta's collection of sensitive health data." The appeals court has not indicated when it will rule on the petition, but Meta lawyers notified the district court that Zuckerberg's deposition may proceed this month in Palo Alto if the 9th Circuit denies its mandamus petition by August 21.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Australia accused of antisemitism after blocking Israeli lawmakers visit
Tel Aviv [Israel] August 18 (ANI/TPS): Israeli right-wing politicians denounced Australia on Monday after Canberra barred Religious Zionism MK Simcha Rothman from visiting the country, calling the decision antisemitic and a capitulation to Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir labeled the move 'a historical stain and a shame for the Australian government," blasting what he described as 'the gloating cries of Israeli left-wing activists, the collaborators of Hamas, and those who defame Israel worldwide." He warned Prime Minister Anthony Albanese that appeasing extremists would not serve Australia's interests, saying such policies risked 'Britain's disastrous path."Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich voiced support for his party colleague, writing on X: 'Simcha, in the face of all the antisemites in the world, the people of Israel stand behind you and support you. Continue to proudly voice Israel's stance. We won't stop until complete victory!"Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli tied the ban to Australia's recent announcement that it will recognize a Palestinian state, saying the visa cancellation was 'a direct extension" of Canberra's 'disgraceful choice to honor the rapists and murderers of Hamas." In English on X, he described the decision as 'a broken moral compass, discrimination, and a grave assault on free speech."Likud MK Tali Gotliv went further, declaring, 'Australia has been antisemitic from time immemorial," and alleging that the country advanced the idea that antisemitism could be solved through 'a territory without Jews."Rothman himself released a statement blasting the decision as surrender to 'the antisemitism raging in the streets of Australia." He said the Jewish community had invited him for a 'solidarity visit" and argued that the visa rejection was tied to the Knesset's recent non-binding resolution supporting annexation of Judea and Samaria. 'The State of Israel must teach the entire world, including the Australian government, how to fight terrorism and not surrender to it — because surrendering to terrorism leads to more terrorism," he to the Australian Jewish Association, which invited Rothman, the MK was due to speak at Jewish schools and synagogues and meet with victims of antisemitic attacks. The group said the visa was canceled just hours before Rothman was to board his flight.'This is a viciously antisemitic move from a government that is obsessed with targeting the Jewish community and Israel," AJA head Robert Gregory said, adding that many Australian Jews were now considering emigration. 'Israel is fully justified in taking strong measures in response to this and we have briefed contacts in the Trump Administration who are also concerned about events in Australia."Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke defended the decision, telling The Guardian, 'Our government takes a hard line on people who seek to come to our country and spread division. If you are coming to Australia to spread a message of hate and division, we don't want you here."Israel's Foreign Ministry has not commented on the move follows Australia's cancellation of visas for pro-Israel activist Hillel Fuld in June and former justice minister Ayelet Shaked last year. Smotrich himself was sanctioned by Australia, Canada, and the UK earlier this summer for allegedly 'inciting] extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights."Approximately 1,200 people were killed and 252 Israelis and foreigners were taken hostage in Hamas's attacks on Israeli communities near the Gaza border on October 7. Of the 50 remaining hostages, around 30 are believed to be dead. (ANI/TPS)
