<story><title>Zoom meetings aren’t end-to-end encrypted, despite marketing</title><url>https://theintercept.com/2020/03/31/zoom-meeting-encryption/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mabcat</author><text>End-to-end encryption has been named as a required feature for telehealth in Australia. Interest in telehealth has gone from zero to infinity over the past two weeks for obvious reasons. So I&amp;#x27;ve been trying really hard to work out if Zoom is E2E, and reached the same conclusions as the article. First, it isn&amp;#x27;t, and second, Zoom are really going out of their way to obscure that fact.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s great that The Intercept is taking a look at this, because it&amp;#x27;s absolutely beyond the capabilities of healthcare practitioners and the professional bodies to get to the bottom of. There&amp;#x27;s a ridiculous amount of confusion here, compounded by &amp;quot;you need to get the HIPAA version because HIPAA means privacy&amp;quot;.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>SkyPuncher</author><text>Just an FYI, two weeks ago, CMS announced it would be suspending enforcement of telehealth tools used in good faith during the COVID pandemic. [0]&lt;p&gt;Basically, if you are a family doc that&amp;#x27;s been thrown into the telehealth ringer, you can get started with everyday tools for video chat, like Facetime, Google Hangouts, Skype, etc - regardless of that tool&amp;#x27;s Hipaa compliance.&lt;p&gt;Overtime I do expect they&amp;#x27;ll want to see providers transition to compliant solutions, but they understand thousands of doctors, some of whom have never delivered telemedicine, can&amp;#x27;t simply audit and on-boarding a new provider overnight.&lt;p&gt;[0] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.cms.gov&amp;#x2F;newsroom&amp;#x2F;fact-sheets&amp;#x2F;medicare-telemedicine-health-care-provider-fact-sheet&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.cms.gov&amp;#x2F;newsroom&amp;#x2F;fact-sheets&amp;#x2F;medicare-telemedici...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>Zoom meetings aren’t end-to-end encrypted, despite marketing</title><url>https://theintercept.com/2020/03/31/zoom-meeting-encryption/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mabcat</author><text>End-to-end encryption has been named as a required feature for telehealth in Australia. Interest in telehealth has gone from zero to infinity over the past two weeks for obvious reasons. So I&amp;#x27;ve been trying really hard to work out if Zoom is E2E, and reached the same conclusions as the article. First, it isn&amp;#x27;t, and second, Zoom are really going out of their way to obscure that fact.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s great that The Intercept is taking a look at this, because it&amp;#x27;s absolutely beyond the capabilities of healthcare practitioners and the professional bodies to get to the bottom of. There&amp;#x27;s a ridiculous amount of confusion here, compounded by &amp;quot;you need to get the HIPAA version because HIPAA means privacy&amp;quot;.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>SamuelAdams</author><text>Hold on, E2E encryption is now required for telehealth in Australia,  yet the Australian government passed laws that required LEO&amp;#x27;s to have access to E2E encrypted data [1]? How are tech companies supposed to comply with that?&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.wired.com&amp;#x2F;story&amp;#x2F;australia-encryption-law-global-impact&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.wired.com&amp;#x2F;story&amp;#x2F;australia-encryption-law-global-...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>