Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

No WhatsApp? No Problem – Guest Chats Are Coming

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,844
39,791


WhatsApp is testing a new feature that allows people to communicate with users over the platform even if they don't have an account.

Whatsapp-Feature.jpg

According to WABetaInfo, the latest WhatsApp beta for Android contains references to so-called "guest chats," which lets users send a link to an online chat, where the "guest" doesn't have to have an app on their device or even need to be in possession of a WhatsApp account.

To kick off a guest chat, the WhatsApp user has to invite someone from their contacts who doesn't have the app installed and share a chat link. When the recipient opens the link, they're granted access to an online end-to-end encrypted chat with the sender – likely via an interface similar to WhatsApp Web.

As you might expect, there will be a few limitations to guest chats. Users won't be able to share media files like photos and videos, and guest chats won't support voice or video messages – only straight text. The mode will also be strictly one-to-one, so no group chats either.

Further technical details on how the guest chats will be implemented have yet to be made available, but the general idea lines up with parent company Meta's efforts to comply with EU rules on platform interoperability. WhatsApp has been working on the ability to integrate third-party chats from iMessage, Telegram, Google Messages, Signal, and others for some time.

It's not clear when guest chats will become generally available, but barring some insurmountable technical hurdle, expect the feature to arrive in a future WhatsApp update for both Android and iOS.

Article Link: No WhatsApp? No Problem – Guest Chats Are Coming
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/08/05/whatsapp-guest-chats-users-no-account/
Interesting, it could be used for chats between package delivery staff and the customer. I think in USA it’s handled with SMS but never got something like that in Spain (they usually call for issues/confirm you’re at home). So the business can generate a chat without an specific phone number and (hopefully) let you join without letting your phone show up to the employee and manage any issue there, although it’s always faster to handle it on a call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: addamas, wanha and SidricTheViking
jdavid_rp said:
Interesting, it could be used for chats between package delivery staff and the customer. I think in USA it’s handled with SMS but never got something like that in Spain (they usually call for issues/confirm you’re at home). So the business can generate a chat without an specific phone number and (hopefully) let you join without letting your phone show up to the employee and manage any issue there, although it’s always faster to handle it on a call.
Click to expand...
Id like to think that it's to expand it's utility. In reality it's probably a stealth applet designed for more Meta data collection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZZ9pluralZalpha, Biro, philosoraptor1 and 1 other person
The thing that I hate most about WhatsApp is how they manipulate people into thinking that end-to-end encryption ticks all the privacy boxes. Yes, Meta might not be able to read your actual messages but they know who you are, who you message, how often, what groups you're a member of and most active in, what groups your most messaged contacts are members of - all that information is gold.

And when you click the OK button to allow WhatsApp access to your Contacts, are you sure your contacts are happy that you've just shared all of their contact info with Meta? Remember that potentially includes where they work, their job title, their date of birth etc.

Do people not wonder why Meta, a company whose very purpose is to farm and sell user data, would offer a service like WhatsApp if they weren't getting marketable personal data out of it?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: dkh587, MacHeritage, adrianlondon and 15 others
NightFox said:
The thing that I hate most about WhatsApp is how they manipulate people into thinking that end-to-end encryption ticks all the privacy boxes. Yes, Meta might not be able to read your actual messages but they know who you are, who you message, how often, what groups you're a member of and most active in, what groups your most messaged contacts are members of - all that information is gold.

And when you click the OK button to allow WhatsApp access to your contacts, are you sure your contacts are happy that you've just shared all of their contact info with Meta? Remember that potentially includes where they work, their job title, their date of birth etc.

Do people not wonder why Meta, a company whose very purpose is to farm and sell user data, would offer a service like WhatsApp if they weren't getting marketable personal data out of it?
Click to expand...
Great points.

While Apple isn't perfect when it comes to privacy, it would've been much better for privacy if Apple had acquired WhatsApp instead of Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg is a villanous scumbag who does not take privacy seriously.

Facebook acquired WhatsApp in 2014. I wonder if Steve Jobs had not died in 2011, would Apple have acquired WhatsApp sooner than Facebook did. Tim Cook is not a products person, so it’s no surprise that he was clueless on how dominant WhatsApp was at the time and how it was on track to growing even larger.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dkh587, MacHeritage, timber and 2 others
There is zero privacy in WhatsApp. I joined recently as I am involved in evaluating some equipment for a manufacturer. Since then, I have received several text messages from businesses on WhatsApp trying to sell me something.

But it is a Meta product, so I guess I should have expected that sort of action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu, russell_314, Biro and 1 other person
RedGT said:
Isn’t this a scammers dream?

I know it’s only an invite from a contact, but……
Click to expand...
THIS.

I love Whatsapp (Apple Messages is a proprietary joke), but there absolutely better be a way to block all guest accounts. I don't want anyone contacting me that isn't on my list.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Mr. Heckles
NightFox said:
The thing that I hate most about WhatsApp is how they manipulate people into thinking that end-to-end encryption ticks all the privacy boxes. Yes, Meta might not be able to read your actual messages but they know who you are, who you message, how often, what groups you're a member of and most active in, what groups your most messaged contacts are members of - all that information is gold.

And when you click the OK button to allow WhatsApp access to your contacts, are you sure your contacts are happy that you've just shared all of their contact info with Meta? Remember that potentially includes where they work, their job title, their date of birth etc.

Do people not wonder why Meta, a company whose very purpose is to farm and sell user data, would offer a service like WhatsApp if they weren't getting marketable personal data out of it?
Click to expand...
Yep. And even further than that — Meta absolutely can read your messages (if they chose to do so), just not on the server side.

The WhatsApp app is the thing at the “end” of the “end to end” encryption chain, and has to decrypt the messages so that it can display them (obvs). It would be trivial for the app to then scan the decrypted messages and send any useful info back to Meta. This is also true for Apple, Signal, and any other app developer.

It would be a huge deal if they did, of course, so I doubt even Meta goes that far. But the point is that you need to trust whoever is creating your apps, as “end to end encryption” is really really important but not a total guarantee of privacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacHeritage and NightFox
AgeOfSpiracles said:
Proprietary isn't the word you want then. Whatsapp is just as proprietary as iMessage.
Click to expand...
I think what he was referring to(in regards to 'proprietary joke') is that unlike iMessage where it requires that you buy Apple hardware to use, Whatsapp even though is owned by Meta does not require a FB account and can be installed in any hardware. This makes iMessage a bit more proprietary in that not only are you getting spied on by Apple, you also need to pay to have that privilege.
 
Cuesca said:
I think what he was referring to(in regards to 'proprietary joke') is that unlike iMessage where it requires that you buy Apple hardware to use, Whatsapp even though is owned by Meta does not require a FB account and can be installed in any hardware. This makes iMessage a bit more proprietary in that not only are you getting spied on by Apple, you also need to pay to have that privilege.
Click to expand...
Obviously. But no, while it's definitely available on a wider array of platforms, it's absolutely every bit as proprietary as iMessage. It's available where Meta decides it is available, just like Apple does for iMessage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nugget and freedomlinux
AgeOfSpiracles said:
Obviously. But no, while it's definitely available on a wider array of platforms, it's absolutely every bit as proprietary as iMessage. It's available where Meta decides it is available, just like Apple does for iMessage.
Click to expand...
What platform is Whatsapp not available on?

It's available on: Windows, MacOS, iOS, Android, Linux, FairOS, OxygenOS.

So tell me which platform is Whatsapp not available for?
 
my business primarily uses whatsapp to communicate with clients. a lot of gringos come down without it installed. this feature update is very welcome.
 
Cuesca said:
I think what he was referring to(in regards to 'proprietary joke') is that unlike iMessage where it requires that you buy Apple hardware to use, Whatsapp even though is owned by Meta does not require a FB account and can be installed in any hardware. This makes iMessage a bit more proprietary in that not only are you getting spied on by Apple, you also need to pay to have that privilege.
Click to expand...

“A bit more proprietary” is like being “a little bit pregnant.” Either you are proprietary or you aren’t. WhatsApp is proprietary, and just also happens to be cross platform because it helps Meta make more money for data collection that way, which is the core of their business. If you think that you’re not paying in a way for WhatsApp, that’s on you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nugget and RichTF
mixmastermike said:
THIS.

I love Whatsapp (Apple Messages is a proprietary joke), but there absolutely better be a way to block all guest accounts. I don't want anyone contacting me that isn't on my list.
Click to expand...
Apple Messages isn’t so proprietary when you consider you can still text with Android phones and anyone with SMS. And now that RCS has come to iMessage, it’s even better. If any messaging platform is proprietary, it’s Whatsapp.
 
This is certainly a thing I‘ll never bother using. My WhatsApp journey ends the second they push ads out in the EU.

Been steadily migrating away from WhatsApp to iMessage and RCS. Like a handful of contacts left that only accept WhatsApp (they go out or their way turning off iMessage and RCS), but come 2026 and ads they‘ll get SMS from me (the handful of times I need to text them non sensitive content).
RCS UP 3.0 support can‘t come soon enough though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lionel77
CapitalIdea said:
ChromeOS, BSD, Tizen.
Click to expand...
Whatapp works on those, it works on anything connected to an internet, so I don't know what you're talking about.

CapitalIdea said:
“A bit more proprietary” is like being “a little bit pregnant.” Either you are proprietary or you aren’t. WhatsApp is proprietary, and just also happens to be cross platform because it helps Meta make more money for data collection that way, which is the core of their business. If you think that you’re not paying in a way for WhatsApp, that’s on you.
Click to expand...
I'm just pointing out the difference between 'Meta spying on you' and 'paying to have Apple spy on you.' I don't think they're equal at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back