Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/20/facebook-data-cambridge-analytica-sandy-parakilas
384 comments
Oh man this is bad.
>the platform operations manager at Facebook responsible for policing data breaches [...] warned senior executives at the company that its lax approach to data protection risked a major breach
>One Facebook executive advised him against looking too deeply at how the data was being used, warning him: “Do you really want to see what you’ll find?”
>They felt that it was better not to know. I found that utterly shocking and horrifying.
>the platform operations manager at Facebook responsible for policing data breaches [...] warned senior executives at the company that its lax approach to data protection risked a major breach
>One Facebook executive advised him against looking too deeply at how the data was being used, warning him: “Do you really want to see what you’ll find?”
>They felt that it was better not to know. I found that utterly shocking and horrifying.
The cool thing? This "whistleblower" already spoke publicly with an op-ed on the NYT months ago.
Again, this is just the top of the newscycle. Let's see what happens in three months from now. My guess: Facebook revenue will go up. This is a PR shitshow, and a great piece of advertising for Facebook's ad department.
A lot of marketers right now are thinking "wait, we could do that with all that Facebook data we have?!"
Attention everyone's smart friend or family member:
Now is not the time to scream "DUH!" or "I told you so!" to people who in the past have not grasped just what they were agreeing to. Now is the time to help your less tech-savvy friends understand the impact their data has in aggregate (like swaying elections!), and how they have been used by this system. Take advantage of all this bad press and help people you care about stop contributing to this machine. If ever you were going to get someone to stop using these services, these are the moments you capitalize on.
Now is not the time to scream "DUH!" or "I told you so!" to people who in the past have not grasped just what they were agreeing to. Now is the time to help your less tech-savvy friends understand the impact their data has in aggregate (like swaying elections!), and how they have been used by this system. Take advantage of all this bad press and help people you care about stop contributing to this machine. If ever you were going to get someone to stop using these services, these are the moments you capitalize on.
How the fuck could people be surprised?
Open a software job board. 50% of offers are by companies trying to optimize some data harvesting and analysis to better target some ads.
Ads, the direct child of propaganda. So to everyone working in those kind of companies: you're not better ethically than people working on missile software. I'd say you're worse because you can argue missiles can be used as deterrent.
Open a software job board. 50% of offers are by companies trying to optimize some data harvesting and analysis to better target some ads.
Ads, the direct child of propaganda. So to everyone working in those kind of companies: you're not better ethically than people working on missile software. I'd say you're worse because you can argue missiles can be used as deterrent.
It's important to realize that Facebook's lax attitude to data harvesting was most likely one key to their success. If they had closely guarded user data, there would soon have been stiff competition, but this way everyone could benefit from Facebook's data treasure trove and Facebook's success was in many other companies best interest. The current state of affairs should therefore be seen not as the result of negligence but a desired outcome of Facebook's core business strategy.
I made a Facebook web scraper which opens 20 headless browsers. You provide a list of unlimited usernames & proxies (you can buy them at https://buyaccs.com/en/). It will scrape every ounce of public information available. I acquired a few million users worth. The data is too easy to get.
Is there any reason to believe that the situation isn't the same in, say, the Android ecosystem? In my experience many 3rd party apps require ridiculous amounts of permissions (contact list etc...) for something that's not core functionality. Surely all these free-to-play crapware games on the Android market have siphoned all the data they could and sold them to the highest bidder? Does Google do a better job of monitoring these apps?
All the self-serving memes are out on parade here: "This not news", "what did you expect?", "anyone paying attention should have known", "it is the new normal", "it could not be any other way", "everyone benefits"...
Actually, as of posting, the "Apple/Google/Microsoft are just as bad" version has not yet put in an appearance.
Actually, as of posting, the "Apple/Google/Microsoft are just as bad" version has not yet put in an appearance.
Stallman is right once again. The response that we used to get is, "but Facebook/Google would never give away their data, they will just use it for targeted advertisement, the data is too valuable to just sell it wholesale to other entities".
> Asked what kind of control Facebook had over the data given to outside developers, he replied: “Zero. Absolutely none. Once the data left Facebook servers there was not any control, and there was no insight into what was going on.”
Um, well yeah. This is the case any time you give data to a third party. They now have a copy, and you can't control what they do with it.
Um, well yeah. This is the case any time you give data to a third party. They now have a copy, and you can't control what they do with it.
It would be interesting to see someone analyze if the relationship between government and Facebook got more news coverage this time than it did when Snowden reported the exact same thing in 2013 or when other people reported it back in 2012. In particular it would be interesting to see which new sites write articles about it and if possible how negative they are.
For example we have CNN article in 2013: https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/30/us/nsa-social-networks/
vs now in 2018: http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/19/technology/facebook-data-sca...
Maybe that would explain why we see so many that got surprised by this while others has seen it for a long time and just got used to everyone not caring.
For example we have CNN article in 2013: https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/30/us/nsa-social-networks/
vs now in 2018: http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/19/technology/facebook-data-sca...
Maybe that would explain why we see so many that got surprised by this while others has seen it for a long time and just got used to everyone not caring.
tell me again why you think the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a bad idea?
From the article:
> He said one Facebook executive advised him against looking too deeply at how the data was being used, warning him: “Do you really want to see what you’ll find?” Parakilas said he interpreted the comment to mean that “Facebook was in a stronger legal position if it didn’t know about the abuse that was happening”.
If this is true – would this constitute willful blindness, and is that not illegal?
> He said one Facebook executive advised him against looking too deeply at how the data was being used, warning him: “Do you really want to see what you’ll find?” Parakilas said he interpreted the comment to mean that “Facebook was in a stronger legal position if it didn’t know about the abuse that was happening”.
If this is true – would this constitute willful blindness, and is that not illegal?
Well of course this was routine. Facebook prides itself on it's data collection and ad targeting. I'm not discounting The Guardian's reporting, but I thought this was known.
I mean you can download your data here and see what endpoints/interests you can be targeted on: https://www.facebook.com/help/302796099745838
Sadly, the world will continue to use Facebook and users will continue to be exploited.
I mean you can download your data here and see what endpoints/interests you can be targeted on: https://www.facebook.com/help/302796099745838
Sadly, the world will continue to use Facebook and users will continue to be exploited.
So the greatest achievement of big data and ML right now is the manipulation of elections a true shock and awe.
And yes, everyone on HN and RMS will say “why is everyone surprised ?” Well it’s because normal people don’t have that perspective and think Facebook is the internet for them.
Data is the new oil but now everyone knows this except just us on HN.
And yes, everyone on HN and RMS will say “why is everyone surprised ?” Well it’s because normal people don’t have that perspective and think Facebook is the internet for them.
Data is the new oil but now everyone knows this except just us on HN.
One thing I can't quite find a straight answer to: is there any suggestion that either FB or CA broke the law here?
Note that I'm not saying that any of this is ok just because there was no illegality.
Note that I'm not saying that any of this is ok just because there was no illegality.
Does anyone else have the wild speculation that Rupert Murdoch is opening a bottle of champagne today?
The interest in FB and privacy, while gratifying, also seems focused through a particularly yellow lens.
People on HN have also pointed out that it’s very likely that CA’a analytical prowess may well be overstated as part of submarine marketing efforts.
I suppose many people are just surprised that this is taking off now, without any truly new or novel fuel driving it - when the same articles and worse, had no effect earlier.
The interest in FB and privacy, while gratifying, also seems focused through a particularly yellow lens.
People on HN have also pointed out that it’s very likely that CA’a analytical prowess may well be overstated as part of submarine marketing efforts.
I suppose many people are just surprised that this is taking off now, without any truly new or novel fuel driving it - when the same articles and worse, had no effect earlier.
>Parakilas, 38, who now works as a product manager for Uber
a company known for their respect of privacy and exemplary business ethics. good that he left facebook.
a company known for their respect of privacy and exemplary business ethics. good that he left facebook.
I'm glad that a light is finally being shined on the sliminess of facebook's business model and that the public are starting to understand what an ugly company facebook is.
I am dismayed at the state of journalism that it took until there was a trump connection until they seriously reported on this
I am dismayed at the state of journalism that it took until there was a trump connection until they seriously reported on this
From the story:
> They seemed to be entirely focused on limiting their liability and exposure rather than helping the country address a national security issue.
This is a national security issue. That seems like the most pertinent issue, and yet there is no mention of it in the discussions here. Facebook has amassed huge amounts of data about all citizens, and adversary nations are leveraging this data to manipulate the nation, including by helping elect a president who will be friendlier towards them.
Facebook is Russia's biggest cyberweapon. Just as private companies would not be allowed to stockpile WMDs, private companies should not be allowed to stockpile so much digital information either. This is a national security issue.
This is a national security issue. That seems like the most pertinent issue, and yet there is no mention of it in the discussions here. Facebook has amassed huge amounts of data about all citizens, and adversary nations are leveraging this data to manipulate the nation, including by helping elect a president who will be friendlier towards them.
Facebook is Russia's biggest cyberweapon. Just as private companies would not be allowed to stockpile WMDs, private companies should not be allowed to stockpile so much digital information either. This is a national security issue.
Are we really that ahead of the curve here? Did the general public not realize that a free service that collects tons of information from you might be gasp using that information to make money?
I know some people who work in SEO and marketing and the stuff CA was doing was a more sophisticated version of what every free Facebook game or 'survey' vendor is doing. This is literally the business model of the free/popular Internet. Of course it's going to be used for political campaigns-- why not? It's used for every other kind of marketing.
I'm not saying it's good. I think it's terrible. It's a plague. I'm just shocked that people are shocked by what's been happening in the open now for years.
I know some people who work in SEO and marketing and the stuff CA was doing was a more sophisticated version of what every free Facebook game or 'survey' vendor is doing. This is literally the business model of the free/popular Internet. Of course it's going to be used for political campaigns-- why not? It's used for every other kind of marketing.
I'm not saying it's good. I think it's terrible. It's a plague. I'm just shocked that people are shocked by what's been happening in the open now for years.
This has literally been de rigeur at any company that does advertising for a decade. Even sports websites have been doing this since forever.
Excuse me if I'm not really horrified by political groups using personal data to craft strategies.
Excuse me if I'm not really horrified by political groups using personal data to craft strategies.
How long before it comes out that Google does the same thing with search history, Amazon with product browsing, Apple with phone usage, and Microsoft with Windows 10 usage?
> ...terms and conditions people did not read or understand.
The article acts like this is unprecedented. No one reads terms and conditions. It's not as if people fork over intimate details of their personal lives to Facebook with the defense that "oh the terms and conditions say they can't use this in a way I don't like"
People fork over intimate details of their personal life to companies like fb because they haven't thought about it very hard
The article acts like this is unprecedented. No one reads terms and conditions. It's not as if people fork over intimate details of their personal lives to Facebook with the defense that "oh the terms and conditions say they can't use this in a way I don't like"
People fork over intimate details of their personal life to companies like fb because they haven't thought about it very hard
I'm OK with data harvesting, but, it has to be transparent and ask for permissions every time they want to use my data, allow me to delete the data I generated. It should always be opt-in.
I use google maps a lot. I search a place, it provides me lots of useful information. Yes, I find it helpful, but also terrifying, especially with the "Popular times" section, which is "based on visits to this place."
Where are the eyes? :/
I use google maps a lot. I search a place, it provides me lots of useful information. Yes, I find it helpful, but also terrifying, especially with the "Popular times" section, which is "based on visits to this place."
Where are the eyes? :/
I still don’t understand the breach part. It just seems like Facebook app developers used Facebook exactly as it was set up, and then resold the data.
What kind of data are we talking about here?
I'm sure there are all kinds of metrics and analytics available but I'm interested:
I'm sure there are all kinds of metrics and analytics available but I'm interested:
What are the "rawest" forms of user interaction that Facebook makes available to these companies?
> utterly horrifying
This has been common knowledge for years. Is the general population not aware of Facebook’s business model?
This has been common knowledge for years. Is the general population not aware of Facebook’s business model?
I've been thinking more and more recently of deleting my facebook profile.
1. I barely add stuff on it 2. 99% of my news feed is irrelevant and I really don't care (there maybe 1 post/day from a friend that is interesting to me) 3. Starting to be more and more concerned about all this data
But I'm scared for multiple reasons:
1. connections needed from a lot of friends, family etc. that I would not keep contact with otherwise 2. It does a great job at keeping my contact list updated (no later than yesterday I searched for friends/coworker to make sure I don't forget anyone on my farewell email) 3. Messenger. I use it a lot (almost as much as iMessage) and again, a lot of people I talk to on facebook I don't have their info for telegram/whatsapp/etc.
1. I barely add stuff on it 2. 99% of my news feed is irrelevant and I really don't care (there maybe 1 post/day from a friend that is interesting to me) 3. Starting to be more and more concerned about all this data
But I'm scared for multiple reasons:
1. connections needed from a lot of friends, family etc. that I would not keep contact with otherwise 2. It does a great job at keeping my contact list updated (no later than yesterday I searched for friends/coworker to make sure I don't forget anyone on my farewell email) 3. Messenger. I use it a lot (almost as much as iMessage) and again, a lot of people I talk to on facebook I don't have their info for telegram/whatsapp/etc.
This is simply the extent to which we've permitted these Internet giants to collect information about us. It's business as usual.
Edit: To clarify, this is indeed worse than if the data were taken from Facebook without consent. What it means is that not only does Facebook have access to vast troves of personal information, but so does everyone tangentially connected to someone with a Facebook developer account.