Elon Musk targets WhatsApp security claims as lawsuit resurfaces, Meta pushes back but what is the truth on privacy? Details here

Earlier this year, Meta became the focus of a class-action lawsuit filed in a US court. The complaint alleges that WhatsApp misrepresented its end-to-end encryption, claiming user messages could be accessed despite assurances of privacy. The company has rejected these accusations, but the issue has resurfaced on X, drawing renewed attention after comments from Elon Musk.

The discussion gained traction after Musk responded to a widely shared post about the lawsuit. He stated, “Can’t trust WhatsApp,” directly questioning the platform’s reliability. In a separate post, he encouraged users to consider his own platform, X, for audio and video communication, suggesting it offers stronger privacy protections.

Musk has previously criticised Mark Zuckerberg and Meta’s services, often promoting alternatives linked to his own ecosystem. His latest remarks continue this pattern, with the ongoing legal case providing a fresh basis for his claims.

Musk was not the only voice raising concerns. Pavel Durov also weighed in during the same discussion. He argued that WhatsApp’s encryption claims could be misleading and alleged that user data may be shared with external parties.

In his statement on X, Durov described WhatsApp’s encryption as potentially deceptive and claimed it allows message access beyond intended recipients. However, it is important to note that Telegram operates differently. Its regular chats are stored on servers and do not use end-to-end encryption by default. Only its “Secret Chats” feature provides full encryption, making its system structurally different from WhatsApp’s standard setup.

At the core of the issue is the lawsuit alleging that WhatsApp’s systems allow access to private messages by employees, contractors, and external partners. The complaint claims that internal tools within Meta can bypass encryption under certain circumstances, particularly when content is flagged or subject to moderation.

It also references external firms such as Accenture and mentions what is described as a “kleptographic backdoor.” According to the filing, these mechanisms could enable message reviews despite the platform’s encryption claims.

WhatsApp has firmly rejected all allegations linked to the lawsuit. Responding publicly, the company stated that the claims are “categorically false and absurd.” It emphasised that its messaging service has used the Signal protocol for end-to-end encryption for over a decade.

The company clarified that messages can only be read by the sender and the recipient, maintaining that no backdoor exists in its system. It acknowledged that limited message review may occur when users report chats or when harmful content is flagged. However, it stressed that this does not equate to unrestricted access to private conversations.

This situation highlights an ongoing debate around messaging privacy, driven by legal claims, public criticism, and competing platform narratives. While allegations have raised concerns, WhatsApp continues to deny any compromise to its encryption system, maintaining that user privacy remains intact under its current framework.