#FactCheck-AI-generated video falsely shared as Saudi airstrike on Yemen's Sanaa International Airport

Introduction

‍

Meta has announced that E2EE in Instagram direct messages is ending entirely. Every day, billions of people send messages they consider private. A medical update to a family member. A photograph meant for one person. A conversation they would never have in public. For years, end-to-end encryption (E2EE) was the technology that made that privacy possible: the digital equivalent of a sealed envelope that only the sender and receiver could open. After May 8, 2026, this will change. 

‍

Understanding the Adoption Gap

‍

Meta pointed to low user adoption as the reason for this change. Few people were using encrypted messaging on Instagram, the company said, so the feature was not worth keeping. That explanation raises some questions. Encryption was never switched on by default. Users had to find it and turn it on themselves. It was not advertised. And it was only available in certain regions to begin with, something Meta noted on its own Help Centre page. Features that require users to actively seek them out tend to get used far less than those that simply work from the start. WhatsApp demonstrates this clearly; encryption has been on by default since 2016, for every user, with no action required. Back in 2019, Mark Zuckerberg spoke publicly about building privacy into Meta’s messaging platforms as a core direction for the company.  The current decision shows a different vision for the company.

‍

The Commercial Dimension

‍

Encrypted message content is not accessible for advertising purposes by design. In December 2025, Meta updated its privacy policy to allow interactions with its Meta AI assistant to inform personalized advertising recommendations across its platforms. With encryption removed from Instagram direct messages, the content of those conversations enters a data environment that already serves Meta’s advertising systems. Meta has not made a direct public statement connecting these two decisions, but technology analysts and privacy researchers have noted the commercial implications of making previously inaccessible message content available within that ecosystem.

‍

What This Means for Users

‍

From May 8, 2026, the content of Instagram direct messages will be accessible to Meta’s systems. This includes messages relating to personal matters that users may have previously sent under the assumption of encryption. A related concern is the question of data security. Unencrypted message content stored on platform servers creates a larger surface area of sensitive information that could be exposed in the event of a security breach. As platforms collect and retain greater volumes of personal data, the potential consequences of unauthorised access grow correspondingly. 

But, there is an argument on the other side. Law enforcement agencies and child safety organisations have long maintained that end-to-end encryption limits their ability to detect and act on harmful content. Removing encryption does make certain forms of platform-level content moderation technically feasible where they were not before.

‍

India’s Supreme Court: The Warning Nobody Heeded

‍

India’s Supreme Court said it plainly when hearing the case against Meta’s 2021 WhatsApp privacy policy, which forced hundreds of millions of users to accept data sharing with Facebook or lose access entirely. Chief Justice Surya Kant called it “a decent way of committing theft of private information” and asked how ordinary people could meaningfully consent to policies written in language they cannot understand. He made it human with one line: “A poor woman selling fruits on the streets — will she understand the terms of your policy?” The court ordered Meta not to share a single word of user data until the case is resolved. When Meta’s lawyers argued that encryption protects users anyway, the bench pushed back: encryption protects message content, not the metadata surrounding it. Who you talk to, how often, at what time, from where: all of it is still harvested. The Competition Commission’s own advocate summarised the entire arrangement in four words: “We are the products.”

‍

WhatsApp: A Question Worth Asking

‍

Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp are three products inside one ecosystem, owned by Meta, serving one business model. Instagram’s encryption is already gone. Is WhatsApp next in line ?

WhatsApp has over 850 million monthly active users in India alone. People do not use it for entertainment, it is how families talk, how businesses run, how essential daily communication happens. It is infrastructure, not an app. Meta acquired it in 2014 promising no ads, no data exploitation. By 2021 that promise was already bending. By 2025 ads appeared in the Status section. Both original co-founders had long since left the company over exactly these concerns. Instagram’s encryption survived until it conflicted with revenue and regulation. WhatsApp’s encryption exists today under the same ownership, the same business model, and the same tightening global regulatory pressure. That is not a reason to panic. It is a reason to pay attention.

‍

Conclusion

‍

Encryption is not permanent. It is a design choice, and like any design choice, it can be undone when priorities shift. After May 8, 2026, Instagram direct messages will no longer be protected the way they once were. For most users, this change will pass unnoticed. But the data those conversations contain will now be accessible in ways it previously was not. What platforms do with user data is rarely announced loudly. Paying attention to the quiet changes matters.

‍

References 

‍

1. https://help.instagram.com/491565145294150
2. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/18/instagram-to-remove-end-to-end-encryption-for-private-messages-in-may
3. https://www.androidpolice.com/why-meta-is-getting-rid-of-e2ee/
4. https://digitalpolicyalert.org/change/13307
5. https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/06/take-it-down-act
6. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/you-cant-play-with-right-of-privacy-of-citizens-scs-big-warning-to-whatsapp-meta-over-take-it-or-leave-it-policy/articleshow/127878524.cms#
7. https://proton.me/blog/instagram-end-to-end-encryption
8. https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2018/09/26/exclusive-whatsapp-cofounder-brian-acton-gives-the-inside-story-on-deletefacebook-and-why-he-left-850-million-behind/

‍

What are Wi-Fi attacks?

Wi-fi is an important area of cyber security and there is no need for physical cable for the network. Wi-Fi has access to a network signal radius everywhere. The devices and systems can have a network without physical access due to Wi-fi. But everything comes with cons and pros, and if we talk about cybersecurity, it has been established that Wi-fi networks are extremely vulnerable to security breaches and it is very easy to be hacked by hackers. Wi-Fi can be accessed by almost every device in the modern day: it can be smartphones, tablets, computers, and laptops. To know whether someone has been tampering with your personal Wi-Fi there are certain signs that can prove it. The first and most important sign is that your internet speed gets slower, as someone else is using your Wi-Fi surf.

Why would anyone hack someone’s Wi-Fi network?

Usually, hackers hack the network because they want access to the confidential data of someone and they can observe all the online activities and data that have been sent through a network. An unauthorize hacker will pretty much be able to see everything you do online. Wi-Fi allows hackers o view information on sites. Any financial information which is saved in the browser can be accessed by hackers and they can alter it and can alter the content you see online. And all the information saved in Wi-fi networks can be used by hackers for their own benefit, they can sell it, impersonate you, or even take money out of your bank through Wi-Fi.

Avoiding vulnerable Wi-Fi networks

The first and foremost rule of protection is that you should not use public networks if that network is easily open to you then that is also available to others and from others, and someone can who wishes to use your confidential and sensitive information, can access that.  If you really need to access the public network in an urgent situation, then you must make sure to limit your activities while connected. And avoid accessing your online banking or pages that require login information. Also, a good measure to take as well is to always delete your cookies after using public WIFI.

How To Secure Your Home Wi-Fi Network

Your home’s wireless internet connection is your Wi-Fi network. Typically, a wireless router is used, which broadcasts a signal into the atmosphere. You can connect to the internet using that signal. However, if your network is not password-protected, any nearby device can grab the signal off the air and connect to your internet. The benefit of Wi-Fi? Wireless access to the internet is possible. The negative? Your internet activity, including your personal information, may be visible to neighboring users who connect to your unprotected network. Furthermore, if someone uses your network to conduct a crime or send out unauthorized spam, you might be held accountable.

Wi-Fi or Li-Fi? –

The common consensus is that Li-Fi technology is more secure than Wi-Fi. Li-Fi systems can be made more secure by integrating a variety of security features. Although these qualities might appear when Li-Fi is widely used in the near future, it is already thought to be safer because of a number of security features. Since the connection’s characteristics make it simpler to lock connections, limit access, and track users even in the absence of encryption and other security features, Li-Fi is seen as being safer. Li-Fi systems will be able to support new security protocols, which will not only enable high-speed networking but also open the door for innovative security techniques to strengthen connections.

Conclusion

A hacker can sniff the network packets without having to be in the same building where the network is located. As wireless networks communicate through radio waves, a hacker can easily sniff the network from a nearby location. Most attackers use network sniffing to find the SSID and hack a wireless network.

Any wireless network can theoretically be attacked in a number of different ways. Use of the default SSID or password, WPS pin authentication, insufficient access control, and leaving the access point available in open locations are all examples of potential vulnerabilities that could allow for the theft of sensitive data. Kismet’s architecture in WIDS mode may guard against DOS, MiTM, and MAC spoofing attacks. routine software updates on the other hand, the use of firewalls may help defend the network against outside intrusion. The act of finding infrastructure issues that could allow harmful code to be injected into a service, system, or organization is known as ethical hacking. They use this technique to prevent invasions by lawfully breaking into networks and looking for weak spots.

Introduction 

In today’s digital world, data has emerged as the new currency that influences global politics, markets, and societies. Companies, governments, and tech behemoths aim to control data because it accords them influence and power. However, a fundamental challenge brought about by this increased reliance on data is how to strike a balance between privacy protection and innovation and utility.

In recognition of these dangers, more than 200 Nobel laureates, scientists, and world leaders have recently signed the Global Call for AI Red Lines. Governments are urged by this initiative to create legally binding international regulations on artificial intelligence by 2026. Its goal is to stop AI from going beyond moral and security bounds, particularly in areas like political manipulation, mass surveillance, cyberattacks, and dangers to democratic institutions.

One way to address the threat to privacy is through pseudonymization, which makes it possible to use data valuable for research and innovation by substituting personal identifiers for artificial ones. Pseudonymization thus directly advances the AI Red Lines initiative's mission of facilitating technological advancement while lowering the risks of data misuse and privacy violations.

‍

The Red Lines of AI: Why do they matter?

The Global Call for AI Red Lines initiative represents a collective attempt to impose precaution before catastrophe, which was done with the objective of recognising the Red Lines in the use of AI tools. Thus, anything that unites the risks of using AI is due to the absence of global safeguards. Some of these Red Lines can be understood as; 

• Cybersecurity breaches in the form of exposure of financial and personal data due to AI-driven hacking and surveillance. 
• Occurrence of privacy invasions due to endless tracking.
• Generative AI can also help to create realistic fake content, undermining the trust of public discourses, leading to misinformation. 
• Algorithmic amplification of polarising content can also threaten civic stability, leading to a demographic disruption. 

‍

Legal Frameworks and Regulatory Landscape

The regulations of Artificial Intelligence stand fragmented across jurisdictions, leaving significant loopholes aside. Some of the frameworks already provide partial guidance. The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act 2024 bans “unacceptable” AI practices, whereas the US-China Agreement also ensures that nuclear weapons remain under human, not machine-controlled. The UN General Assembly has adopted resolutions urging safe and ethical AI usage, with a binding and elusive global treaty. 

On the front of data protection, the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) of EU offers a clear definition of Pseudonymisation under Article 4(5). It also describes a process where personal data is altered in a way that it cannot be attributed to an individual without additional information, which must be stored securely and separately. Importantly, pseudonymised data still qualifies as “personal data” under GDPR.  However, India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) 2023 adopts a similar stance. It does not explicitly define pseudonymisation in broad terms, such as “personal data” by including potentially reversible identifiers. According to Section 8(4) of the Act, companies are meant to adopt appropriate technical or organisational measures. International bodies and conventions like the OECD Principles on AI or the Council of Europe Convention 108+ emphasize accountability, transparency, and data minimisation. Collectively, these instruments point towards pseudonymization as a best practice, though interpretations of its scope differ. 

‍

Strategies for Corporate Implementation 

For a company, pseudonymisation is not just about compliance, it is also a practical solution that offers measurable benefits. By pseudonymising data, businesses can get benefits, such as; 

• Enhancing Privacy protection by masking identifiers like names or IDs by reducing the impact of data breaches. 
• Preserving Data Utility, unlike having a full anonymisation, pseudonymisation also retains patterns that are essential for analytical innovation. 
• Facilitating data sharing can allow organizations to collaborate with their partners and researchers while maintaining proper trust.  

According to these benefits, competitive advantages get translated to clauses where customers find it more likely to trust organizations that prioritise data protection, while pseudonymisation further enables the firms to engage in cross-border collaboration without violating local data laws. 

‍

Balancing Privacy Rights and Data Utility

Balancing is a central dilemma; on one side lies the case of necessity over data utility, where companies, researchers and governments rely on large datasets to enhance the scale of AI innovation. On the other hand lies the question of the right to privacy, which is a non-negotiable principle protected under the international human rights law. 

Pseudonymisation offers a practical compromise by enabling the use of sensitive data while reducing the privacy risks. Taking examples of different domains, such as healthcare, it allows the researchers to work with patient information without exposing identities, whereas in finance, it supports fraud detection without revealing the customer details. 

Conclusion

The rapid rise of artificial intelligence has led to the outpacing of regulations, raising urgent questions related to safety, fairness and accountability. The global call for recognising the AI red lines is a bold step that looks in the direction of setting universal boundaries. Yet, alongside the remaining global treaties, practical safeguards are also needed. Pseudonymisation exemplifies such a safeguard, which is legally recognised under the GDPR and increasingly relevant in India’s DPDP Act. It balances the twin imperatives of privacy, protection, and data utility. For organizations, adopting pseudonymisation is not only about ensuring regulatory compliance, rather, it is also about building trust, ensuring resilience, and aligning with the broader ethical responsibilities in this digital age. As the future of AI is debatable, the guiding principles also need to be clear. By embedding techniques for preserving privacy, like pseudonymisation, into AI systems, we can take a significant step towards developing a sustainable, ethical and innovation-driven digital ecosystem. 

‍

References 

https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/782752/ai-global-red-lines-extreme-risk-united-nations

https://www.techaheadcorp.com/blog/shadow-ai-the-risks-of-unregulated-ai-usage-in-enterprises/

https://planetmainframe.com/2024/11/the-risks-of-unregulated-ai-what-to-know/

https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/dangers-unregulated-artificial-intelligence

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2023/06/02/the-15-biggest-risks-of-artificial-intelligence/ 

https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/the-act/