Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine • Hacker News Board

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#221

Post by camillomiller » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:12 PM UTC

sveme wrote: post #32

camillomiller wrote: post #2

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?!…

GDPR can't come too soon. That would definitely put an end to these shady practices, as the penalties of several individual infractions would endanger any company.

It will offer a possibile solution in Europe, where Facebook has already been under heavy scrutiny. It won't change anything in the US, South America, SE Asia and developing countries where Facebook is already dangerously synonimical to the whole online experience of the average user.

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#222

Post by jakelazaroff » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:13 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #188

jakelazaroff wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Breach" specifically implies that defenses were penetrated. But as you said, Facebook is not trying to protect our data. This is far worse than if the data were taken from them unwillingly, because it vastly increases the number of entities with unfettered access to it.

> ”Breach" specifically implies that defenses were penetrated It’s time to update the definition. “Breach” means you lost my shit. I thought I gave it you in confidence and then you lost it. Facebook arguing “this isn’t technically a breach” comes across as their yet again talking down to users to slip problems under the rug.

Sure, but we still need some term to disambiguate between "a company didn't protect my data against intruders" and "a company sold my data, then didn't like what the buyer did with it".

This isn't like the Equifax breach. It's not a result of Facebook's security practices. It's a result of Facebook's entire business model.

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#223

Post by na85 » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:14 PM UTC

24gttghh wrote: post #146

na85 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I up voted because your point is relevant. However, Software development is not a Profession, in the proper use of the term. It is not self-regulating the way Medicine, Engineering, Law, and a few others are. There is no formal standard of ethical conduct in software for practitioners to use as a baseline for their own behaviour.

Ahem: http://ethics.acm.org/code-of-ethics/software-engineering-co... >1.03. Approve software only if they have a well-founded belief that it is safe, meets specifications, passes appropriate tests, and does not diminish quality of life, diminish privacy or harm the environment. The ultimate effect of the work should be to the public good. edit: this version is from 1992 . And I should point out my courses at least h…

How is this enforced? What is software development as a field doing to regulate itself and ensure members follow this guide?

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#224

Post by phkahler » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:14 PM UTC

generalk wrote: post #149

jakelazaroff wrote: post #8

Can we not let this become framed as a "breach"? No systems were compromised. Nothing of Facebook's was accessed that wasn't supposed to be accessed. This was data intentionally exposed by Facebook , just exfiltrated and given to an entity whom Facebook hadn't authorized. 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,…

> Can we not let this become framed as a "breach"? No > systems were compromised. Nothing of Facebook's was > accessed that wasn't supposed to be accessed. This was > data intentionally exposed by Facebook, just exfiltrated > and given to an entity whom Facebook hadn't authorized. This is similar to a HIPAA "breach" where the word doesn't imply that a security system was compromised, but that protected data was acces…

>> ...but that protected data was accessed by folks who shouldn't have had it.

Facebook handed over the data. They need to understand that they don't have control over it once it leaves Facebook. Is a violation of ToS a data breach? Do we really want to conflate those things?

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#225

Post by scottmf » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:14 PM UTC

peterwwillis wrote: post #175

scottmf wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever considered the possibility that many people actually are shocked? Why do “people love to pretend” that genuine outrage and the sincere desire to stop immoral practices doesn’t exist? Many people sincerely care about what’s right, even if they fall prey to human flaws and cognitive biases from time to time. Perhaps those who talk about how “everyone” just “loves to act like” x and “virtue signal” y are m…

That's even more sad. It would mean that even though they care deeply about outcomes, they either willfully ignore the things that result in those outcomes, or have amnesia, or are just incapable of doing anything about it. Take Congress for example. Approval ratings are what, 20%? They're generally seen to be corrupt, and they don't get anything done, right? So why aren't they voted out of office? Why are people sur…

Things aren’t so black and white.

For your congress problem it’s actually none of the reasons you listed. The cause of the discrepancy is the 20% approval rating is for congress as a whole, but people don’t vote for congress as a whole, they vote for individual representatives.

People do like their own representatives, and those approval ratings are often very good in their own district. It’s the rest of congress they don’t like.

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#226

Post by Mc_Big_G » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:15 PM UTC

Delete your Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp accounts.

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#227

Post by amrx101 » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:16 PM UTC

avoutthere wrote: post #47

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?

They are already doing it mate.

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#228

Post by bogomipz » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #8

Can we not let this become framed as a "breach"? No systems were compromised. Nothing of Facebook's was accessed that wasn't supposed to be accessed. This was data intentionally exposed by Facebook , just exfiltrated and given to an entity whom Facebook hadn't authorized. 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,…

>'Can we not let this become framed as a "breach"?'

Just because it wasn't a hack does not mean it wasn't a breach. To wit - a breach of data governance, breach of trust, breach of moral responsibility.

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#229

Post by discordance » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

So the Cambridge Analytica stuff had been public for a while, as has Facebook's responsibilty in the matter.

The cynicist in me wonders if this is all lighting up intentionally before GDPR is enacted to reduce potential financial liability. Too conspiratorial?

Re: Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine

#230

Post by zeveb » Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

flexie wrote: post #48

malikNF wrote: post #3

What's utterly horrifying about this whole thing is how the media is acting as if this is some sort of surprise. Like what did you think was happening at a company collecting data about billions of people? Especially at a company that has a CEO who is famous for calling its own users dumb fu * * s? A company that experimented on at risk teens. Like come on. --edit--- Or lordy, didn't expect this comment to blow up th…

"Parakilas, 38, who now works as a product manager for Uber, ..." So from one reckless company that doesn't give a damn about the law to the next. Who teaches developers that it's okay to work for anyone as long as the tech is cool and the salary is great?

> So from one reckless company that doesn't give a damn about the law to the next.

Uber doesn't appear to have historically given a damn about the law, but AFAIK it has historically given a damn about its users. Facebook, OTOH, doesn't appear to be giving a damn about its users.

As for the law: there are plenty of unjust laws out there; I respect someone who fights unjust laws such as the taxi monopolies. I don't respect someone who fights just laws.