Games

Instagram, no more all-private chats: what changes for us and what privacy alternatives there are

by Alessandro Longo

13 May 2026

3' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

3' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

Instagram has closed a path that in recent years seemed inevitable fate, for this social as for the internet in general: the path of (truly) private messaging. As of 8 May 2026, the platform will no longer support messages with end-to-end (i.e. full) encryption in direct. For many users the difference will be almost invisible, because on Instagram that protection had never become the standard. But for those who had activated it on some conversations, the novelty is there: the technical guarantee that not even Meta can read the content of chats disappears.

The point needs to be clarified. When it comes to 'protected messages', not all protections are equal. Even without end-to-end encryption, a service can encrypt data as it travels between device and server. But with end-to-end, the content remains readable only to the participants in the conversation. Without this architecture, the service provider at least theoretically returns to being able to access the messages, manage them or deliver them if required under the applicable rules.

There is a bit of media chaos on the issue these days. Well to know that not all Instagram DMs were covered by end-to-end encryption. The feature was optional, not active by default. This means that for a large proportion of users, the novelty does not change the actual privacy level of many daily conversations: those chats were already outside that protection perimeter.

Instead, users who had chosen encrypted chats for more sensitive, personal or confidential exchanges were directly affected. In these cases, Instagram indicated that the affected chats would show instructions to download messages and media content that may need to be stored. In some cases, it may also be necessary to update the app to complete the operation.

For the user, there are some practical consequences.

Instagram is now no longer the place for conversations that require strong confidentiality: financial data, sensitive documents, health issues, credentials, sensitive work information or personal exchanges that one would not want exposed to the service provider.

Instagram should therefore be considered in the group of apps where messaging remains useful to coordinate, comment on content, exchange non-sensitive files, but not to replace a truly private channel.

On the official side, Meta explained the change by the low uptake of the feature on Instagram's DMs. This is the point that emerges from the 9 March 2026 update published by Meta Newsroom. However, the broader context must also be considered: for years, governments, authorities and child protection associations have challenged the expansion of strong encryption in social platforms, arguing that it makes it more difficult to detect abuse and criminal content, such as child pornography.

Moreover, end-to-end still did not protect against all risks. It did not, for instance, prevent the recipient from taking screenshots, forwarding content or showing the phone to third parties. The difference mainly concerned the non-accessibility of the content by the platform.

So what to do?

For those who use Instagram mainly for occasional messages, the change may not justify any revolution. The simplest solution is to leave the light conversations on Instagram and move the sensitive ones elsewhere.

For those who want to remain in the Meta ecosystem, the normal alternative is WhatsApp or, to a different extent, Messenger. On Messenger, Meta has introduced end-to-end encryption as the default setting for personal chats and calls. WhatsApp, however, is more convenient and more used for messages.

Those who put privacy first, however, look especially to Signal, where end-to-end encryption is not optional but standard operation of the service.

And Telegram? Beware: some still see it as synonymous with privacy, but from a technical point of view this is a prejudice. Not all Telegram chats are in fact end-to-end encrypted. Full protection applies in Secret Chats, which are separate and not the default behaviour of the app. In short, Whatsapp is more private than Telegram. Another issue is wanting to get away from the Meta personalised advertising system, which, however, in Europe on Whatsapp is heavily restricted by our regulation. Again, for the few who care, the solution is again Signal not Telegram. With the obvious counter-indication that we will find far fewer contacts there than on Whatsapp, with whom to exchange messages.

Finally, one could read this latest move by Meta as confirmation that the world is less interested in privacy than it was ten years ago, when - adownstream of the Snowden case on global mass eavesdropping - it was all a blossoming of encryption by default, on the web and on chats. Possibly; the development of large language models also makes it easier for automated mass analysis of our messages (and social posts) for security (or surveillance) purposes.

The alternatives to escape the phenomenon, however, are there. For the few who really care.