Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Brazil Judge Orders Phone Carriers To Block WhatsApp Message App (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the what's-going-on dept.

A Brazilian judge has ordered wireless phone carriers to block access to Facebook's WhatsApp indefinitely, starting on Tuesday, the third such incident against the popular phone messaging app in eight months. Reuters report: The decision by Judge Daniela Barbosa Assuncao de Souza in the southeastern state of Rio de Janeiro applies to Brazil's five wireless carriers. The reason for the order was not known due to legal secrecy in an ongoing case, and will only be lifted once Facebook surrenders data, Souza's office said. Sao Paulo-based representatives at WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook Inc, as well as the Brazilian five carriers -- Telefonica Brasil SA, America Movil SAB's Claro, TIM Participacoes SA, Oi SA and Nextel Participacoes SA.

11 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. "The reason for the order was not known" by by+(1706743) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm sure this doesn't have anything to do with it...

    1. Re:"The reason for the order was not known" by aristofeles · · Score: 3, Informative

      Indeed. From http://convergenciadigital.uol... "More than that, the judge considers that if it is not possible to break the encryption, the service itself must be prohibited, since it does not lend itself to the enforcement of judicial decisions."

    2. Re:"The reason for the order was not known" by rwiggers · · Score: 4, Informative

      From a Brazilian news, the order was to offer a backdoor to the encrypted messages and/or to redirect the messages to the authorities before encryption.
      http://tecnologia.uol.com.br/n...

    3. Re:"The reason for the order was not known" by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Informative

      The reason for the order was not known due to legal secrecy in an ongoing case

      That's strange, because I know what the article author claims not to know. Brazil wants information that they can't legally get. So they are (illegally) forcing a shut down of Whatsapp to put pressure on Facebook to try to get the information. If that works Watsapp will be turned on again. If it doesn't work and there isn't a lot of blow back from the population, then Facebook itself may be next, but in reality they expect that shutting down Facebook would draw too much attention to their tactics so it is unlikely to occur.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    4. Re: "The reason for the order was not known" by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Hello Brazilians,

      Unfortunately we cannot provide our service to you anymore. In case you're wondering why, it's because of this judge. He lives here. This is his phone number. If you don't agree with his decision, maybe tell him how you feel about it.

      --signed, Mark Z."

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Just plain extortion by randomErr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My guess is that Brazilian authorities want personal information on a citizen from Facebook and Facebook will not comply. I hope the judge is ready for the repercussions of his decision. If this goes through I look for mass protests and the call for the removal of the judge. There is almost no way Facebook can't come out this smelling like a rose.

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  3. 96% ! by ramriot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In consideration of:-

    1/ the fact that due to massively expensive texting costs that Brazilian carriers place on customers ~96% of them use Whatsapp.

    2/ Whatsapp just happens to offer full e2e strong encryption.

    3/ Criminals want to save money also.

    So criminals use whatsapp to communicate, thus thwarting legal interception.

    I would suggest to the Judge that the root problem is not Whatsapp but the government supported telecoms carriers who forced this situation to exist.

    Also, seriously Judges. Someone needs to go down there and teach them the meaning of impossible.

  4. "Blocked". What does "blocked" mean in this case? by idontgno · · Score: 3, Funny

    How are they going to "block" this app?

    Prevent WhatsApp traffic from transiting phone carrier networks? Doesn't affect Wi-Fi, then. Prevent WhatsApp traffic from transiting any network? That would need the Great Wall of Amazonia, which doesn't exist. Any traffic to WhatsApp servers? By IP block? By routing blackhole? By DNS block? That might work if they can get every net provider to agree. Until the next version incorporates a workaround.

    Maybe the judge has no idea, and neither do the folks who are supposed to implement it.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  5. Re:"Blocked". What does "blocked" mean in this cas by thoriumbr · · Score: 4, Informative

    All telecom carriers on Brazil must block access to WhatsApp servers. 3G/4G, and cable are affected. The only Brazilian users still with WhatsApp access are those using a proxy or VPN server outside Brazil. Like me.

  6. Re:monkey business by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Probably not. Everyone knows you can run your apps over wifi. Blocking it at the carrier won't work. Now are they going to block ALL internet access? Good luck with that.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  7. Way more information available... by brazilian+rabbit · · Score: 3, Informative

    This link - http://exame.abril.com.br/tecn... - (In portuguese) - Has way more information about this issue. Some interesting points from it: -Suspension will occur because Facebook didn't provide messages for an investigation still underway. -The judge says that Facebook responded the request in English, not an official language in Brazil. -Important: THE REQUESTS ARE ONLY FOR FUTURE MESSAGES. (Justice seeks only to obtain copies of future messages of the investigated). -The company argues that providing the messages will make its users lose faith in the app. The Judge calls it BS: Phones are recorded all the time and people didn't lose faith / stopped using their telecom providers. -There is a fine of ~15K USD/day until the order is followed.