editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links
to our partners.
Learn More
A new class-action lawsuit is challenging one of WhatsApp’s core privacy claims, alleging that Meta Platforms can read user messages despite assurances that chats are protected by end-to-end encryption.
Filed in federal court in California, the suit accuses Meta of misleading billions of users by marketing WhatsApp as “unbreakably” encrypted while allegedly retaining internal access to message content.
“WhatsApp and its parent company, Meta, store, analyze, and can access virtually all of WhatsApp users’ purportedly ‘private’ communication,” said the plaintiff attorneys in the lawsuit filing.
Encryption Claims Are Facing Skepticism
If the allegations are substantiated, the case could undermine trust in one of the world’s most widely used messaging platforms and raise broader questions about how encrypted services communicate privacy guarantees.
The lawsuit highlights growing skepticism around proprietary encryption implementations and whether marketing claims accurately reflect real-world data handling practices.
The plaintiffs allege that Meta stores and analyzes message content after delivery and that internal tools allow employees to access private chats.
According to the complaint, these practices contradict WhatsApp’s marketing language and in-app notifications stating that only message participants can read conversations.
The Lawsuit Challenging WhatsApp’s Encryption Claims
At the center of the lawsuit is WhatsApp’s use of end-to-end encryption (E2EE), which is designed to ensure that only the sender and recipient can read messages.
Plaintiffs argue that the encryption claims are misleading if Meta can still access “the substance of communications,” not just metadata.
The complaint cites unnamed whistleblowers alleging Meta can access message content, but provides no technical evidence to support the claims.
This distinction matters because metadata — such as who messages whom and when — can reveal patterns of behavior, but message content can expose sensitive personal information, including health details, intimate conversations, and private relationships.
The plaintiffs contend that such access undermines user trust and causes psychological harm, even if no external breach has occurred.
Meta disputes these claims entirely, maintaining that it does not store messages after delivery and cannot access encrypted content by design.
The company has emphasized that its encryption implementation prevents even WhatsApp itself from reading messages in transit.
Encryption Doesn’t Eliminate Privacy Risk
While no evidence has surfaced to support claims of message decryption by Meta, security professionals note that end-to-end encryption does not eliminate all privacy risks.
Optional cloud backups stored on services like iCloud or Google Drive may not always be end-to-end encrypted by default, depending on user settings, potentially allowing access if cloud providers are legally compelled.
Additionally, WhatsApp — like most messaging platforms — collects metadata for operational and security purposes.
While metadata does not reveal the message content, it can still be used to infer communication networks and behavior patterns.
These realities often complicate user expectations shaped by simplified “no one can read your messages” marketing language.
How Organizations Can Reduce Messaging Risk
As questions around encrypted messaging and data handling continue to surface, organizations and users should take practical steps to reduce risk beyond relying on encryption claims alone.
While end-to-end encryption remains a critical safeguard, real-world exposure often comes from backups, metadata, and how platforms are used in practice.
A layered approach that combines technical controls, policy enforcement, and incident preparedness can help close these gaps.
- Enable end-to-end encrypted backups where available and verify how messaging platforms handle backup encryption and key management.
- Minimize metadata exposure by using privacy-conscious network controls and understanding what communication data is collected beyond message content.
- Establish clear policies restricting the use of consumer messaging apps for sharing sensitive or regulated information.
- Evaluate messaging platforms as part of vendor risk and compliance assessments, including reviews of encryption, retention, and transparency practices.
- Apply data classification and data loss prevention (DLP) controls to reduce the risk of sensitive information being shared through unmanaged messaging channels.
- Update and regularly test incident response plans to account for potential exposure involving third-party messaging platforms.
- Reduce long-term data exposure by limiting message retention, using disappearing messages, and managing cross-device access carefully.
These steps help strengthen messaging security and cyber resilience.
The Gap Between Encryption Claims and Reality
Regardless of how the lawsuit ultimately unfolds, it underscores a growing gap between how encrypted messaging is marketed and how risk is experienced in practice.
The case is a reminder that strong cryptography alone does not equal comprehensive privacy, particularly when backups, metadata, and user behavior come into play.
With growing scrutiny of encryption claims, organizations should reassess how messaging platforms fit into their broader security, compliance, and incident response strategies.
As trust in platforms becomes harder to assume, zero-trust solutions offer a framework for continuously verifying access, behavior, and risk across every layer of communication.
