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

LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#61

Post by nostromo »

sudovancity wrote: post #10
uptown wrote: post #2

Just go to the “people you may know” page and you’ll see dozens of shadow profiles of people who clearly don’t have LinkedIn accounts. Mine shows relatives who I know don’t have accounts — but whose contact info was scraped by LinkedIn during my dumber years when I opted into their “help us connect you by linking your account” bullshit. Is there a way to request they remove this data? I sure don’t know how.

I brought this up to my mother who has been retired now for about 15 years but somehow still has a linkedin account. She never created one but somehow still had a profile, it freaked me out.

My long dead grandpa has been a recommended connection for many years now. He was a home builder and never signed up for an account. I have no idea how they got his info and connected it to me. Creeps me out...

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#62

Post by [deleted] »

travem wrote: post #33
downandout wrote: post #9

LinkedIn's growth, much like Facebook's, can mostly be attributed to the use of its "contact importer," which seems to have been where the 18M email addresses came from. Generally speaking, you should read the fine print when using such "features". I do see an issue with part of this complaint: storing hashed emails and uploading those to use for targeted advertisements. The general consensus seems to be that even un…

An email hash can be used to identify an individual and so would very much be in the scope of GDPR, the same as any other number used to identify an individual. Curious why you think that would not be the case. It seems to fall squarely into Article 4’s definition of personal data.

[deleted]

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#63

Post by kbumsik »

whiddershins wrote: post #19

I am 99% sure LinkedIN used my IP address to match with my second floor neighbor, despite their claims that they would never use IP address as a connection data point. I was sharing my wifi for a brief period with my neighbors on the second floor. My neighbor had a new room mate. The guy was from another country. He didn't work in the same industry I do. I didn't have any of his contact information anywhere on any of…

I'm not sure legal stuff but isn't using IP address for identification different story from using IP just for location data?

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#64

Post by skrebbel »

dawhizkid wrote: post #53

What I don't get is why Jeff Weiner and Reid Hoffman are never held accountable for their blatant disregard for user privacy despite many lawsuits over the years. Why is their reputation still so in tact even when Zuck/Sandberg's is hurting over the exact same privacy violations? Why is Reid Hoffman today selling a book on "blitzscaling" which is all about achieving hypergrowth at all cost? Could you imagine how tone…

> Why is their reputation still so in tact even when Zuck/Sandberg's is hurting over the exact same privacy violations?

I have no idea, but the cynic in me says "because Facebook forms a bigger threat to media organizations".

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#65

Post by S-E-P »

I wonder how long they can do these sneaky things that they've been accused of before someone (or more appropriately, something) brings the long arm of the law into this.

Litigation could be a possible avenue. Cut off the serpant's head and all that.

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#67

Post by marksomnian »

civility wrote: post #56
oh_sigh wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just hashes of IP addresses

I knew a guy who worked in an industry where using SSNs for identifying people was illegal. Their solution was to prefix the SSN with a leading one. Compliance.

... how is that legal? If you cannot match by SSN, surely you still cannot match by SSN-but-with-a-prefix?

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#68

Post by alxlaz »

skrebbel wrote: post #64
dawhizkid wrote: post #53

What I don't get is why Jeff Weiner and Reid Hoffman are never held accountable for their blatant disregard for user privacy despite many lawsuits over the years. Why is their reputation still so in tact even when Zuck/Sandberg's is hurting over the exact same privacy violations? Why is Reid Hoffman today selling a book on "blitzscaling" which is all about achieving hypergrowth at all cost? Could you imagine how tone…

> Why is their reputation still so in tact even when Zuck/Sandberg's is hurting over the exact same privacy violations? I have no idea, but the cynic in me says "because Facebook forms a bigger threat to media organizations".

As shady as LinkedIn is (and it's damn shady!), its use in mass manipulation and disinformation is far less important. It played a minor role in elections (everywhere, not just in the US), wasn't use as a means of public promotion of genocide as in Myanmar, and it doesn't have a large base of "alt-right" (and local equivalent) groups. The worst you run into on LinkedIn is awkward young professionals asking you out. That's hardly on the same level of nastiness as Facebook, regardless of how much of a threat (!?) it would be to media organizations.

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#69

Post by yhoiseth »

dawhizkid wrote: post #53

What I don't get is why Jeff Weiner and Reid Hoffman are never held accountable for their blatant disregard for user privacy despite many lawsuits over the years. Why is their reputation still so in tact even when Zuck/Sandberg's is hurting over the exact same privacy violations? Why is Reid Hoffman today selling a book on "blitzscaling" which is all about achieving hypergrowth at all cost? Could you imagine how tone…

Good question. Some hypotheses:

- Fewer users => smaller impact

- Fewer ads => smaller abuse potential

- Users spend less time on LinkedIn

- Users share less personal information

- LinkedIn has other revenue sources than ads, making them less risk-taking in the ads business

- More savvy users

- People don't feel as sorry for professionals as they do for other people

- Fewer/less impactful breaches

- More likeable founders

Re: LinkedIn violated data protection by using 18M email addresses of non-members

#70

Post by sonnyblarney »

dawhizkid wrote: post #53

What I don't get is why Jeff Weiner and Reid Hoffman are never held accountable for their blatant disregard for user privacy despite many lawsuits over the years. Why is their reputation still so in tact even when Zuck/Sandberg's is hurting over the exact same privacy violations? Why is Reid Hoffman today selling a book on "blitzscaling" which is all about achieving hypergrowth at all cost? Could you imagine how tone…

It might be because FB is a much more broadly known brand in the world, and regular news outlets like CNN are significantly more likely to go after public faces.

The world knows who Zuck is.

Nobody knows who Weiner is, except in tech.

Even if there were some coverage, it might not get widely picked up, editorial rooms would just think it too narrow.

Also - there needs to be an 'obvious scandal' with legs - like the the Cambridge Scandal literally had that pink-haired guy with many photo ops making a name for himself, it gives a 'face' to the issue.

Maybe this one breaks though, it could get picked up.

Post reply on HN