WhatsApp: Deleted Sent Messages Can Still Be Read by Recipients

WhatsApp: Deleted Sent Messages Can Still Be Read by Recipients


  • WhatsApp “Delete for Everyone” can be thwarted
  • The new method requires third-party app, or stock widgets
  • The deleted messages can be accessed via notification log

WhatsApp, one of the most widely used instant messaging apps, rolled out “Delete for Everyone” feature recently. But do deleted messages really disappear from the phone? A new report claims that WhatsApp messages that are deleted are actually still on the device and can be easily accessed.

Spanish Android blog Android Jefe has claimed that deleted messages are present in the notification log of the device. It adds that the recipient can easily access the deleted messages regardless whether it has been deleted from sender’s end. “What we found is that the messages are stored in the notification register of the Android system. So, it’s just a matter of entering that record to see the messages that the other person deleted,” the blog said.

The blog explains that anyone can access deleted WhatsApp messages sent to them via a third-party app named Notification History which can be downloaded via Google Play. After downloading the app, users will have to search the message in the Android notification log. Those users who are using third-party launchers like Nova Launcher it’s even easier. The notification log can be accessed without the need of an additional app. Long press the home screen, then tap on Widgets > Activities > Settings > Notification log. You can then access the system’s notification log. Similarly, on stock Android, a Settings widget can give access to the notification log as well.

Gadgets 360 tried both the Notification History third-party app and the Activities method described above. discovered that the trick worked on an Android device. There are few limitations, however, as the messages that have generated a notification on the device can be retrieved. The notification log only saves the messages on the device until it’s restarted. Once restarted, we noticed that the log was cleared.

The method, however, has a restriction that only the first 100 characters of the deleted message will be visible. The feature is available only for users running Android 7.0 and above. Users can only retrieve text which means any kind of media file cannot be recovered.

This is not the first time that reports of retrieving deleted messages have surfaced. Jonathan Zdziarski, iOS expert, last year has claimed that WhatsApp saved chat logs on the device despite it being archived or deleted.

One of the biggest use cases of the Delete for Everyone feature has been when a user send a message to the wrong chat, or if the message sent contains a mistake. It is the latest feature added to WhatsApp in a long list of features introduced this year, and is biggest change to the chat app since blue ticks aka send receipts.


iPhones Grow in Popularity, But Android Platform Still Leads

smartphone makers

Apple continues to lead the pack in the U.S. as a smartphone make.   To iPhone users, that’s probably not a surprise.  iPhone users tend to be loyal fans.

More than 39 percent of mobile subscribers in the 3 month average ending April used Apple smartphones, comScore reports. That’s more than any other smartphone maker.

And popularity is growing.  April’s figures are a 1.4 percent increase over Apple’s share of the market as measured in January. The company’s market share in this category actually increased by nearly a full percentage point over its closest competitor, Samsung.

Here is how the rest of the smartphone market breaks down:

Samsung was next, with 22 percent of the market, up just over half a percentage point since January. These figures could change in favor of Samsung if the company sees customers confidently buying its Galaxy S4 smartphone or its competitively priced Galaxy S4 Mini (when it’s released).

Phone makes HTC (9.7%), Motorola (8.6%), and LG (7%) follow.

Android Leads, If Measured By Operating Platform

If you count by operating platforms — instead of phone makers — the story is different.

Google’s Android continues to dominate in the smartphone operating system market. This market is measured by the number of subscribers using the Android operating system, versus a particular make of phone.

According to comScore’s MobiLens service, over half of the 138.5 million smartphone users in the U.S. have phones running Google’s Android platform. But Android’s lead among operating systems decreased nearly two full percentage points from January to April.

Apple’s iOS, of course, is next at 39% and saw a 1.4 percent increase as mentioned above.

BlackBerry and Windows phones’ market shares each dropped a bit, less than a percentage point over the same period, according to the MobiLens survey.

MobiLens gets its information from a nationwide sample of smartphone subscribers over the age of 13. Only primary mobile phone numbers are used to collect data.

Shutterstock, smartphone


Jim Fowler of Owler: Even as Tech and Data Grows in Importance, Crowdsourcing Is Still About People

Jim_Fowler (1)

Small Business Trends: Before we jump on full bore with that maybe give us a little bit of your personal background leading up to what you were doing with Jigsaw.

Jim Fowler: After college I was a diving and salvage officer in the United States Navy doing salvage operations and paid back Uncle Sam for my college tuition. Then when I got out of the Navy I was an owner-operator of a small ski area up in Idaho until I hit age 30 and that was 1995. At that point in time I thought I’d better get serious and get a real job, so I ran away and joined the internet circus in 1995. Got into the internet technology business then and became a sales guy for a while before I founded Jigsaw in ’03.

Small Business Trends: Was that a need that you filled from your experiences of being a sales person?

Jim Fowler: Actually I had been on my 3rd stint as the VP of sales at that point and I was just frustrated with how much time my sales reps were spending trying to figure out who to contact at a target organization. Needing a phone number and an email to get them and talk to them, so Jigsaw was really founded out of a point of need.

We looked at how that market was working. It was lots and lots of players, no one really owned it and we came up with a crowd sourcing model for that. It was basically a gigantic business card exchange in the sky where you could go in and say, “Hey, I need to know who are the people at this company, and I have contact data for people at this other company so I’m going to trade it,” and that’s how it worked and it ended up creating a huge and really high quality database that in 2010, Salesforce ended up buying for $175 million dollars.

Small Business Trends: You used a crowd sourcing model and what modern technology was back then to create that business. Fast forward to 2012 after you had sold to Salesforce and you started up with InfoArmy, there were some similarities. You were still looking at the business information space, although I think it was a little bit more competitive intelligence information with InfoArmy.

Jim Fowler: Yep.

Small Business Trends: It was crowd sourced and it was the modern technology at the time, so talk a bit about the differences from what you did with Jigsaw and InfoArmy from a crowd sourcing perspective?

Jim Fowler: The commonalities have always been business information and crowd sourcing it.   InfoArmy was really about recruiting an army of global researchers who would do really in depth reports on companies and use the crowd that way. I funded it for our 1st round for 2 million, and then we raised another 17 million dollars in late ’12 because we got a lot of traction, but we found that that model really didn’t work. We ended up just changing the name of the company and pivoting, which was by the way a very painful process.

From the whole concept around this crowd sourcing model, it just has huge value because you end up getting the crowd, in exchange for getting a free product that has a lot of value to them they do a lot of work on the data, which creates a very valuable data set that large companies will pay a lot of money for. That’s exactly how Jigsaw worked and that’s exactly how the InfoArmy and Owler models work as well.

Small Business Trends: The model didn’t quite work the way you expected with InfoArmy. You’re still using the wisdom of the crowd approach and you’re still using modern technology, but how are you applying it now when it comes to Owler?

Jim Fowler: Owler’s just much more open, it’s completely free. What it does is it helps people keep on top of their competitive set. They get these weekly showdowns that show them how their company’s doing versus their competitors and they get daily snapshots which give them information about their companies, their competitive set, their customers, anyone they want to follow.

What happens is the users come in and interact with this data, that’s for instance some of these weekly showdowns will show revenue estimates and how the companies are doing revenue wise amongst many other factors and our users actually go in there and, with the wisdom of crowds give their estimates. When you combine it all you get a really high quality there, but we also do other things like news and alerts where we also use a combination of technology and people.

We get business news feeds from about 5,000 global sources, and technology handles most of that, but what happens is we have a team of people that actually make sure that it’s high quality. A lot of your listeners probably use Google Alerts, and that’s a pretty frustrating experience. Google is an amazing technology company, but technology can only take you so far down the road and there’s just a lot of noise with Google Alerts, you get tons of different emails.

What ours does is just brings it all together. If you’re following 50 companies, it’s just going to give you 1 email that shows what is all the news and alerts on those companies that’s really super high quality without all the noise, if you will.

Small Business Trends: This is really interesting because now we’re 2015, getting ready to go to 2016 and the technology available is just amazing in a lot of instances, but what you’re saying, at least it sounds like is, you’re using that amazing technology that’s at your disposal to enhance what humans do in the business model. Not to try to take over or cut out what humans do.

Jim Fowler: Yeah, let’s take a quick example. We have another product that’s also free called Special Reports. A lot of people are interested when a company receives funding, or a company gets acquired. Right now, the way that most people have seen that data come out is they’ll just see a headline that says, “So and so got bought,” or maybe “So and so got bought got X dollars,” or , “So and so received this much money.” Then they’ve got to click it and try to read this article to get all the data they want.

What we do is go in and create a special report that gives a quick one sentence description of the company. We’re pulling data from the prop file on Owler.com, what their funding history is, who funded them, who their competitors are and how much revenue their competitors are doing estimated by out community. It just gives a full picture, plus all the news articles that talk about that funding or that acquisition so that you can just see it in 1 place.

If you just used technology to try to do this, you would get a lot of noise in there because really it’s a lot harder than it looks to figure out that the article is actually about Apple. Apple gets mentioned in millions of articles. To know that it’s actually about Apple is … To just do it with technology is really hard. What technology can do is say, “We think this is an article about Apple and we think it’s an Apple acquisition and we think this is the company that they did and we think this is it,” but what you need to do is create a task that gets prioritized very highly that a human looks at really quick. Checks out all the data and goes, “Ah, that’s right. We’re good,” and then sends it on to the people.

Otherwise you get a lot of noise, what I’m getting at is that technology can get you way down the road, but you need humans to get you all the way down the road if you want high quality data.

Small Business Trends: You’ve made a number of different changes, from when you started with Jigsaw to where you are with Owler in terms of tweaking the model, leveraging the technology, but at the heart of it all it’s still been about leveraging the intelligence that actual humans have. How, if at all, has the model changed for the more traditional business data services like Dunn and Bradstreet? Have they morphed to take advantage of what’s available today or is it still pretty much the same business model?

Jim Fowler: It’s pretty much the same business model. They always go out there and talk about, well we’ve got this technology and that technology. There are some good technologists there certainly, but the reality is is they just don’t innovate. Many of the big guys have tried crowd sourcing models and completely failed and I think it’s just because it’s not in their DNA.

If you don’t start from the very beginning with the crowd in mind and what they want and make sure that they’re equal partners in your business model, then it is destined for failure. I’ve spoken on stage about this many many times, but what crowd models do do for you, it’s what I call the Tom Sawyer effect. You’re getting people to paint your picket fence. In this case, they’re getting more value back than they’re giving to you, in Jigsaw’s case it was free.

By the way, people had a pay option in Jigsaw, so each of these models is a little bit different. At Jigsaw you could go in and either trade data you have for data you needed or you could just pay for the data you wanted. At Owler, what we do is it’s so many people are use it, we get a lot and we’re getting more and more interaction on it. We’re getting such value we can just keep it free and open  … We want millions and millions of business professionals using Owler everyday for free as part of their workflow. Everyday, this is how they do it, this is how they keep track of their competitors, their own company, their customers, their prospects, etc.

Every single one of these crowd sourcing models provide value to the crowd because once you get that, they’re doing the work for you. You’re just providing a platform for them to do it, that’s why these models are so valuable. Companies like D&B, they have to either build their own technology to do that which only will get them so far. Then they have to actually pay people to do it all the time and when you do that at scale it just doesn’t work. It’s too expensive, and that’s why D&B is so expensive comparatively.

Small Business Trends: I think my final question around this is you’ve been looking at leveraging the wisdom of the crowd for over a decade, through Jigsaw to InfoArmy to what you’re doing with Owler. How has the crowd changed? What’s been the most significant change you’ve seen in the actual crowd, the people? Not the technology, but just the people.

Jim Fowler: I think they change in the same way that we all have. We all are just overloaded with information.  Getting people’s time and getting them to pay attention is much more difficult now than it was back in the beginning of Jigsaw for sure. Getting journalists and analysts to talk and write about you is different because there’s so much going on. In fact a lot of the big publications don’t even exist or don’t write about it anymore.

It’s become much more flat, if you will. More players in it, so that’s interesting, but I just think the biggest thing is just people … There’s so much stuff flying around out there now that really making sure you have a crisp clear message so that they understand the value is even more important than it ever was and that’s just been the big change. People are more sophisticated, they’re more … They know how to use data and I see that trend continuing.


Apple Still a Star Without Steve Jobs, but Doubts Linger

Apple Still a Star Without Steve Jobs, but Doubts Linger

Apple Still a Star Without Steve Jobs, but Doubts Linger
Five years after the death of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, the Silicon Valley tech giant is bigger and stronger, despite lingering doubts over its future without the visionary leader.

In financial terms, Apple has been an unstoppable juggernaut: Its profit for the 2015 fiscal year was a whopping $53 billion (roughly Rs. 3,52,647 crores) on revenues of $234 billion (roughly Rs. 15,56,974 crores) – both figures doubled since the final year of Jobs’s reign before he died of pancreatic cancer on October 5, 2011.

Apple’s market value is more than $600 billion (roughly Rs. 39,51,660 crores), below its 2015 highs but more than twice its level of 2011 and holding above Google parent Alphabet as the world’s most valuable corporation.

Still, some analysts question whether Apple – which redefined the smartphone experience with its trend-setting iPhone introduced in 2007 and created a vast ecosystem of mobile applications – is losing momentum.

“It’s really hard to keep up the innovation cycle when you have developed a successful product,” said technology analyst Jack Gold of J. Gold Associates.

“With each successful generation (of a product) it becomes harder. The question becomes, ‘What’s the next big thing?’ and it’s not clear what that is going to be.”

Vivek Wadhwa, a Carnegie Mellon University professor and former Silicon Valley entrepreneur, was more blunt, saying Apple is living off its earlier innovations with little new to offer.

“We have seen no major innovations for Apple” since the Steve Jobs era, Wadhwa told AFP.

With the latest iPhone 7, Wadhwa said, “they market it well but it’s the same device all over again.”

Competing with Tesla?
Apple has moved into new services such as streaming music and mobile payments, and is believed to be working on virtual reality and autonomous driving technology. But the bulk of its revenue and profits still come from the iPhone.

“They haven’t figured out what they want to deliver,” Wadhwa said.

“If they wanted an Apple car it should have been out there now to compete with Tesla.”

Jobs’s successor Tim Cook has won plaudits for his performance keeping Apple on a steady path, even though no one sees him as the same kind of leader.

“Tim Cook is an operations guy, he is great in getting the supply chain to churn out things,” said Jan Dawson of Jackdaw Research.
“He knows his limitations. He knows he is not the most charismatic presenter. He knows he is not Steve Jobs.”

Still, Dawson sees Cook as broadly successful in keeping Apple on track. He noted that Apple has doubled its spending on research and development since Cook took over.

“They stick to a certain price point and a premium experience, and that hasn’t changed from Steve Jobs to Tim Cook,” Dawson said.

Apple has succeeded not by being first in a market segment but by improving and perfecting certain products.

“They weren’t the first to make an MP3 player or smartphone or tablet,” Dawson said. “Apple bides its time and when it can make a significant contribution to a category it comes in and improves the experience. That was true in the Steve Jobs era as well.”

Dawson said it is not clear if Apple would be in a different place if Jobs were alive today, with the smartphone market largely saturated and touch competition from rivals.

“People look at the iPhone and say nothing else has lived up to that, but there aren’t any other technology categories like that,” he said.

Wadhwa argued however that Cook has had chances to “reinvent” the company and has failed to do so.

“He’s basically an operations guy who is living in the past,” Wadhwa said.

Wadhwa posited that Apple, with its vast cash reserves, could buy Tesla and put its highly regarded chief Elon Musk in charge of the company.

“You need a crazy visionary leading the company,” he said.

“People have shown a lot of patience because we all love Apple. And I love Apple. So it’s not too late to save the company.”

Tags: Apple, Tim Cook, Steve Jobs, Mobiles, Tablets, Macs, iPhones, iPads, Apple Watch, Wearables