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

Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 127 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#41

Post by tzahola »

fixermark wrote: post #14

""" Zuckerberg reluctantly acknowledged that Facebook gathers information on people who aren't signed up for Facebook for what he said were "security purposes." """ That's a pretty disingenuous way to phrase Zuckerberg's response to a question of whether Facebook uses cookie tracking for logged-out users. Which of course it does, and it's of course used for security purposes; one has to be able to unify sessions from…

What? No. They're not talking about logged out users. They're talking specifically about people who don't even have a Facebook account: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-11/zuckerber...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#42

Post by fixermark »

bkovacev wrote: post #32
fixermark wrote: post #14

""" Zuckerberg reluctantly acknowledged that Facebook gathers information on people who aren't signed up for Facebook for what he said were "security purposes." """ That's a pretty disingenuous way to phrase Zuckerberg's response to a question of whether Facebook uses cookie tracking for logged-out users. Which of course it does, and it's of course used for security purposes; one has to be able to unify sessions from…

How can one protect himself against this?

To a first approximation: you can install browser extensions (or modify your /etc/hosts file or a router up-the-chain from your device) to re-route requests to Facebook URLs / IP addresses to a black hole.

To a larger approximation: if a third-party chooses to share their information on your browsing habits with Facebook, that's not something you can control. But it's probably a much rarer, much smaller attack surface.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#43

Post by daveFNbuck »

Slansitartop wrote: post #21
thisisit wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe more engineers becoming aides or staff to these politicians?

Or maybe just spend more time with aides trying to grasp the technical issues? I'm going to send some letters to my Senators and Representative asking them to work closely with the EFF, EPIC, etc. to formulate any regulation on this, rather than Facebook itself.

Or maybe just smarter politicians. Politicians aren't elected based on their ability to understand a wide range of technical issues. A lot of people in Congress campaigned on not understanding basic facts about reality.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#44

Post by fixermark »

ynniv wrote: post #38
Arnt wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please elaborate.

A competent adversary won't carry cookies between sessions, so there is no security afforded by it. These cookies are solely to track the general population.

I agree, but I also note you may be underestimating the number of competent adversaries in the world and the cost / benefit analysis of doing something like this to eliminate a large-percentage case of bad behavior.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#45

Post by wavesounds »

fixermark wrote: post #14

""" Zuckerberg reluctantly acknowledged that Facebook gathers information on people who aren't signed up for Facebook for what he said were "security purposes." """ That's a pretty disingenuous way to phrase Zuckerberg's response to a question of whether Facebook uses cookie tracking for logged-out users. Which of course it does, and it's of course used for security purposes; one has to be able to unify sessions from…

Zuckerberg is the one being disingenuous. By acknowledging cookie tracking or scraper tracking, he answers the question that indeed FB tracks offline usage, but only mentions the innocuous cases and fails to acknowledge the Shadow Profiles[1] they clearly have

1. https://www.dailydot.com/news/facebook-shadow-profiles-priva...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#46

Post by OrganicMSG »

warent wrote: post #9
dlandis wrote: post #5

> Zuckerberg claimed not to know what "shadow profiles" are Did he really claim outright to not know what they are? Anyone have that quote from the testimony?

I do recall hearing live that he said he wasn't familiar with the term "shadow profiles." This may have been honest, I hadn't heard it before this hearing either, but then again I'm not the CEO of Facebook, so his answer is certainly troubling

>In 2011, Schrems created Europe versus Facebook, which published the documents Facebook had sent him and flagged up where they didn't comply with EU law. He got in touch with the Office of the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (IDPC) -- Facebook Ireland is the "data controller" for its European users -- and sent 22 detailed complaints showing how Facebook wasn't compliant, five relating to it allegedly not deleting data. He also complained about "shadow profiles", where Facebook collects contact information relating to non-users when users sync their contacts from other services.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/privacy-versus-facebook

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#47

Post by thisisit »

Given how things are taken out of context in today's media, giving a resounding Yes to an answer which requires a detailed answer is a bade idea. Congress/Senate hearings are not exactly CS101 class. So, it is better to be keeping answers short and maybe it comes off vague.

Politician clue-ness on the issue also doesn't help.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#48

Post by gsich »

fixermark wrote: post #44
ynniv wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A competent adversary won't carry cookies between sessions, so there is no security afforded by it. These cookies are solely to track the general population.

I agree, but I also note you may be underestimating the number of competent adversaries in the world and the cost / benefit analysis of doing something like this to eliminate a large-percentage case of bad behavior.

The cost is immense (tracking of non-users) the benefit is low (being able to detect multi accounts).

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#49

Post by fixermark »

common_ wrote: post #37
fixermark wrote: post #14

""" Zuckerberg reluctantly acknowledged that Facebook gathers information on people who aren't signed up for Facebook for what he said were "security purposes." """ That's a pretty disingenuous way to phrase Zuckerberg's response to a question of whether Facebook uses cookie tracking for logged-out users. Which of course it does, and it's of course used for security purposes; one has to be able to unify sessions from…

This isn't just basic cookie tracking. They have an actual profile on you, without your consent, with the people who have you in their address book and even potentially your purchasing habits, from the data they purchase from data brokers like Datalogix. They maintain this profile on you separately from other users, and they make immediate use of it if you create an account. That's why it's called a shadow profile.

How does such a practice differ morally from consumer credit reporting agencies?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Refuses to Admit How Facebook Works

#50

Post by gringoDan »

TekMol wrote: post #24

Is lying in front of congress a crime? If I was a senator, I would have asked these two questions: When I look at a product in an onlineshop like Amazon, afterwards I see adverts for this product on Facebook. How does this work? When I visit a physical store, afterwards I see adverts for this store on Facebook. Even on my desktop computer. Even though I don't have any facebook apps on my phone. How does this work? If…

Zuckerberg was not under oath, but even so, lying to Congress is a federal crime.

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-will-not-be-u...

More info on "under oath": https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/24/politics/penalty-for-lying-to...

Post reply on HN