WhatsApp denied the accusations of the Iranian regime – which accused this application (detained by Mark Zuckerberg’s goal) of being at the service of Israel, “The Zionist Enemy.” “We do not provide mass information to any government,” says WhatsApp
The company responsible for WhatsApp, the goal, rejected on Wednesday the accusations of the Iranian regime, which claims that the application of messages is sharing information from User with Israel.
The complaint came from Iranian state television, which appealed to the population to remove WhatsApp from their mobile phones, in a moment of increasing military tension between the two countries.
“WhatsApp and Instagram are collecting information about individuals and providing them to the Zionist enemy, including their last known location and communications identified with their own names,” said the state station, without presenting any proof to support the accusations.
The response of the US company was not long. In a statement, WhatsApp has classified the allegations as false: “We are concerned that these unfounded accounts wipe out the pretext for blocking our services, precisely at a time when people need it.”
The platform also stressed that all messages sent are protected by end -to -end encryption, which means that only the sender and recipient have access to the content – so theoretically not even WhatsApp himself can read.
In recent days, internet services in Iran have suffered significant interruptions. Employees, experts, and citizens point to finger at the Iranian government, who may be deliberately restricting access to waging the dissemination of information on military attacks and mitigating eventual Israelite cybers.
Still in the same statement, WhatsApp stressed that it does not monitor the messages exchanged between users, nor does it follow its precise location, and guaranteed: “We do not provide mass information to any government.”
Tip -to -end end -to -end technology – designed precisely to protect digital privacy – remains a considerable obstacle to security and spying services that try to access private communications. And in a context of open war “in the shadow”, confidence in communication channels becomes, more than ever, a parallel battlefield.
