415

The European Union has recently reached an agreement on a significant competition reform known as the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which will impose strict rules on large tech companies that will have to offer users the ability to communicate with each other using different apps. WhatsApp is one of the companies that will be required to comply with the new regulations outlined in the European Union’s Digital Markets Act. This is because WhatsApp is considered a gatekeeper service since it’s a large tech platform with a substantial user base and falls within the criteria set by the DMA. With the latest WhatsApp beta for Android 2.23.19.8 update, which is available on the Google Play Store, we discovered that WhatsApp is working on complying with the new regulations:

As you can see in this screenshot, WhatsApp is working on a new section dedicated to the new regulations. Since it is still in development, this section is still not ready, it appears empty and it’s not accessible to users, but its title confirms to us that they are now working on it. WhatsApp has a 6-month period to align the app with the new European regulations to provide its interoperability service in the European Union. At the moment, it remains unclear whether this feature will also eventually extend to countries beyond the European Union.

Interoperability will allow other people to contact users on WhatsApp even if they don’t have a WhatsApp account. For example, someone from the Signal app could send a message to a WhatsApp user, even without a WhatsApp account. While this broader network can definitely enhance communication with those people who use different messaging apps and assist those small apps in competing within the messaging app industry, we acknowledge that this approach may also raise important considerations about end-to-end encryption when receiving a message from users who don’t use WhatsApp. In this context, as this feature is still in its early stages of development, detailed technical information about this process on WhatsApp as a gatekeeper is currently very limited, but we can confirm that end-to-end encryption will have to be preserved in interoperable messaging systems. In addition, as mentioned in Article 7 of the regulations, it appears that users may have the option to opt out when it will be available in the future.

Third-party chat support is under development and it will be available in a future update of the app. As always, we will share a new article when we have further information regarding this feature.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 106 points 1 year ago

How about starting with the company who says you have to buy their phone to use their messenger. If Apple isn't eventually considered a gatekeeper, then this is a joke.

[-] ninjaturtle@lemmy.ninja 79 points 1 year ago

iMessage isn't as big in Europe as it is in the US. They just looked at it and declared it's too small to be seen as a gatekeeper, in that market.

[-] XioR112@lemmy.ml 50 points 1 year ago

No, EU lunched 5 months investigation to decide whether iMessage is big enough.

[-] 10EXP@sh.itjust.works 56 points 1 year ago

^^ To add: It wasn’t EU that declared it too small. It was to be on the list until Apple disputed iMessage’s position as a gatekeeper, claiming it was too small. EU will now investigate. Same with Bing and Microsoft Edge.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] Virkkunen@kbin.social 86 points 1 year ago

Up to a month ago, people were irritated and would constantly complain about having to use "too many chat apps" to talk with people. The EU then demands messaging apps to be interoperable, now people are irritated and will constantly complain that they do not want to send messages to X service or participate in Y service group chats

It's comical

[-] iturnedintoanewt@lemm.ee 44 points 1 year ago

Apparently the feature can be disabled...But how this is implemented will be the main point. We'll see. I for one welcome this (forced) change. Maybe I can finally uninstall Whatsapp.

[-] Virkkunen@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago

I hold my bets that it's going to use the Matrix protocol and keep using Signal's encryption, this is pretty much what;;s out there already.

About too many apps, I never got bother by it really, but recently I discovered Beeper, which is a fancy frontend for an ansible playbook with matrix bridges for many popular chat apps, and I really liked the convenience of having everything in one app. The playbook they use is FOSS, obviously, and you can self host it, which I did. I use the Element app and I have bridges for WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Discord, Instagram and Messenger. There are some flaws and quirks still, but in time they'll be patched out.

If you're into self hosting, I recommend checking out the playbook, or if you just want the work done for you, check out Beeper (and for the American folks, Beeper has SMS/RCS integration and can use iMessage on Android, Windows and Linux)

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

If they're smart they'll just do nothing to block spam via the new feature except offering a button in all new chats to turn the feature off (just like there currently is a report/block button).

Spammers will do the rest for them :(

And I'm not even worried about writing this here - I'm not giving them ideas, this one was obvious from the start.

[-] XTornado@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

they do not want to send messages to X service

I feel like most would understand it, Xitter has gone downhill.

Sorry I found it too funny that we cannot use the letter X as example in some situations as it could be confusing 😅.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pixelvolt@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago

People who use Telegram and Signal wants to avoid Facebook at all cost and Zuck comes up with shit.

[-] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago

If each chat connection gets a unique ID and zero info on my [pseudo]identity then that's great! Otherwise if this means they'll plug me into their social network to profile me that way - nah, thanks

[-] fuzzzerd@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

Not sure you have a choice, other than to opt out.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] couragethebravedog@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

I do not trust Whatsapp to provide the security of a signal conversation. Who wants signal and WhatsApp to talk to each other ?

[-] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 1 year ago

To convert yourself out of WhatsApp, then your friend, then your other friend. Instead od doing it all at once.

[-] Madbrad200@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 year ago

People who use WhatsApp but have friends who want to use signal and vice versa.

Your average person really does not care about this stuff,they just want something easy and familiar. This is good for people who care enough to use signal but still want to actually chat to people.

[-] dafo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I use Signal and refuse WhatsApp. However, my karate club uses Messenger to communicate, for example if you can't show up one night.

My shihan asked if I could communicate with him over WhatsApp, which I declined. But I like the idea of being able to text him that I can't show up, or if there are some changes needed to our website. Things which aren't exactly sensitive.

[-] Asudox@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It indeed is not a good thing, because Signal might not do shit with your data, but WhatsApp might. Your conversation is mirrored to the WhatsApp user afterall. Though It would be nice if it was an optional and "dangerous" option to enable in the advanced options section. Just like how WhatsApp will allow you to disable interoperability. Because I'd rather use Signal's app over using WhatsApp if I am not going to succeed in getting others to join Signal at the very least.

[-] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Just.. Don't put stuff in the WhatsApp chat that you wouldn't like shared.. I don't see how it's bad, it's not like all your convos are being mirrored and it's something you never have to use if you choose not to, but it'd be nice to be able to talk to those people who will never migrate away that I've completely lost contact with outside of Facebook since leaving WhatsApp.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 24 points 1 year ago

As a Signal user this will be very much welcome. I abandoned FB and its messenger to cut down on aplications on my phone and giving a fat f-u to that cancer. Then I had to jump on Discord to keep in contact with friends but I just don't like it. If I can Signal all my contacts regardless the bag of bricks they're using, it will be a win.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] otter@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 year ago

Like a lot of the comments here, I misunderstood it from the headline

The European Union has recently reached an agreement on a significant competition reform known as the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which will impose strict rules on large tech companies that will have to offer users the ability to communicate with each other using different apps.

I didn't know this was a thing, what other apps/platforms are affected by this?

Interoperability will allow other people to contact users on WhatsApp even if they don’t have a WhatsApp account. For example, someone from the Signal app could send a message to a WhatsApp user, even without a WhatsApp account.

So it's about being able to message someone from Signal to Whatsapp. That might be a good thing for Signal/Telegram users, since you always have the option to NOT message someone from those platforms.

What I'm curious about is what data Facebook can collect from a Signal user. I assume Signal will take steps to block third party data harvesting, assuming this even goes through. There's a similar issue with Threads and other for profit companies joining the fediverse. At least with Signal there isn't that much data to begin with. I think Fediverse platforms also need some more safeguards on the privacy/security side.

[-] GigglyBobble@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

What I’m curious about is what data Facebook can collect from a Signal user.

Exactly my thought. How will participants be id'ed? Facebook won't jump through hoops to prevent collecting phone numbers for this.

Registering by phone number has been a major discussion point towards Signal too and I personally only tolerate that because I trust them enough to only store them hashed. I don't trust Meta.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Asudox@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

I heard that Signal said that they won't interoperate with WhatsApp and such? Some blog was going on about that.

[-] fuzzzerd@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

That's too bad, but I'm not sure how they can enforce it since anyone can build their own version of the signal client, nothing stopping WhatsApp from doing something like that.

[-] scurry@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Anyone can build an implementation of the Signal client, but few do already because Signal actively works to prevent them from working with the Signal infrastructure, and likely will continue to do so. It’s one of the more common complaints about Signal, but it was built on the assumption that centralized services would be easier to use and to make private if the platform holder wanted, as well as more robust against attacks. They could well be wrong, and people just haven’t thought of and deployed the right tech, but it’s neither here nor there; I’m doubtful they can be convinced on this, and I’d doubt they’d be made to open up anyway by this regulation, meaning they’re not obligated to.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Rooki@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Its literally required ( in some way ) in the EU. with the new DMA.

[-] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

For me it’s really good news, but I understand why some people would worry about encryption and the data transmitted to bad companies.

Still, I’m sure it’ll also be reglemented and as long as you can opt out, I’m fine with it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] shotgun_crab@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Very useful if implemented well

[-] EdherJr@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Will they do this everywhere, or only in the European Union?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] expatriado@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

and they want to join the Fediverse too, they are acting like the guy that wants to fit in by force. It all smells like some monopoly shenanigans

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Granixo@feddit.cl 4 points 1 year ago

Nice try, Mark.

I'm not sharing my pr0n with you.

[-] 3laws@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Nice try, Mark.

I'm not sharing my dark web hacking guides by socialist cute femboys with cat ear headphones on RGB puke standing desk at the rhythm of some sick synthwave mixes.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
415 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

59094 readers
3289 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS