Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 436 posts

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#161

Post by dglass »

mattnewton wrote: post #43

On the CA story, I get where the guy is coming from with the “It was not a breach.” He’s a technical guy, and this wasn’t a technical hack. It’s like a lock manufacturer wanting to let everyone know that the customer had the door open, and their locks weren’t broken. But in this case, he wasn’t just a lock manufacturer, he was in charge of security for the home. I can’t help but think of Steve Jobs parable of the Jan…

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure the word "breach" is reserved for specific security incidents that fall above a certain threshold. Something like if X amount of users were affected it must be considered a breach, which means the company must alert the authorities and alert all users who have been affected.

If he's saying it wasn't a breach it's probably because it doesn't fit the actual criteria for considering something a breach, but doesn't mean he's trying to downplay the severity of what happened.

Edit: difference between a data breach vs. a security incident - https://www.alienvault.com/blogs/security-essentials/whats-t...

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#162

Post by Khaine »

fooey wrote: post #17

There's breaking reporting that Facebook just had personnel in the Cambridge Analytica offices before the UK authorities could get there with warrants. https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/975844154361221121 > BREAKING: Facebook WAS inside Cambridge Analytica's office but have now "stood down" following dramatic intervention by UK Information Commissioner's Office.. https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/9758…

Thats some shady shit

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#163

Post by danso »

jdminhbg wrote: post #147
danso wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a Twitter thread by someone who worked on Obama's campaign talking about her firm's use of Facebook data. It was tweeted by Julian Assange so I'm assuming it's one of the more damning examples of the Obama campaign using social media data: https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975564499297226752 https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975 This person asserts that people from Facebook gave them their bless…

> I ran the Obama 2008 data-driven microtargeting team. How dare you! We didn’t steal private Facebook profile data from voters under false pretenses. OFA voluntarily solicited opinions of hundreds of thousands of voters. We didn’t commit theft to do our groundbreaking work. But isn't the bigger problem sucking up the entire social graph from a small seed of users, not how those users signed up in the first place? If…

No doubt, spamming is a practice that people hate. Whether it's as unethical as what's being alleged against CA is another matter, though. AFAIK, there was nothing when signing up for the quiz app that said your data would be used for political purposes. At most, the quiz might have been said to be affiliated with a Cambridge professor and his studies [0].

[0] https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/sites/gsb/files/conf-presentati...

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#164

Post by tptacek »

metafunctor wrote: post #152
tptacek wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just that Stamos' clarification doesn't really clarify anything in the NYT story itself.

Yeah. The timing's weird, but stranger things have happened...

What's weird about the timing? I assume NYT ran it as soon as they could confirm it, and that Alex commented as soon as it was published. The timing here seems pretty straightforward.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#166

Post by AFNobody »

this_user wrote: post #83
AFNobody wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its corporate speak for "The PR department and/or my boss gave me marching orders to delete them."

And probably the legal department too. He was inadvertently delivering ammunition to anyone who might want to come after the company for this, which seems like something that might very well happen.

Yup but Legal is probably smart enough to realize deleting it won't make it go away tho.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#167

Post by Zarath »

TAForObvReasons wrote: post #106
RpFLCL wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This fact has me more confused than anything. What did most people think Facebook was doing... Keeping all the data locked away an never letting anyone make use of it? The interest in that data by political entities should have been especially obvious. Additionally, this information about Cambridge Analytica came out months ago. I remember first hearing about it on a podcast that was mostly focused on the personality…

I think culturally we've accepted that political propaganda is different from run-of-the-mill corporate advertisement. Even the words we use are different: few people would call a TV spot "propaganda", even though both seek to influence people to act in a certain way. People understand and accept the concept and execution of advertisement. Propaganda is not received in the same way.

I personally call it "brainwash", as "propaganda" tends to have political connotations (which I think may be a reason you don't see it associated with typical advertising).

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#168

Post by lsh123 »

fooey wrote: post #17

There's breaking reporting that Facebook just had personnel in the Cambridge Analytica offices before the UK authorities could get there with warrants. https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/975844154361221121 > BREAKING: Facebook WAS inside Cambridge Analytica's office but have now "stood down" following dramatic intervention by UK Information Commissioner's Office.. https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/9758…

Just curious, what authority does FB have to have the personnel in CA offices? Why didn't CA simply call the cops to get them out?

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#169

Post by tzakrajs »

Time for Facebook to pivot, and pivot quickly they must.

edit: Daniel Ive of GBH Insights supports this notion: “Changes to their business model around advertising and news feeds/content could be in store over the next 12 to 18 months,” Ives wrote in a note to investors. http://time.com/5205336/facebook-shares-fall/

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#170

Post by oflannabhra »

My greatest hope with all of the noise surrounding this, is that the engineers and employees at Facebook realize that Facebook and Zuckerberg’s vision does not line up with reality. Zuckerberg believes that Facebook will connect people and change the fabric of society and communities for good in a way that was heretofore impossible.

Between Facebook’s political issues and the happiness-depressing effects of its use, I think it is pretty easy to draw the conclusion that Facebook is a net negative for society. This is without even taking into account the amount of PII that has been concentrated into a single entity (who monetizes it), or the effects of algorithmically appealing to people’s desires.

A hundred years from now, Equifax, YouTube, and Facebook will be lumped into the same pile: companies who profit off of information about consumers. The algorithmic veneer that protects YouTube and Facebook will be gone by then.

I’m not trying to condemn anyone, and I’m not in the position of having to weigh providing for my family with making ethical choices.

But, I think it is clear that change for Facebook will not come from the top. It will only come as people leave.

Post reply on HN