FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names • Hacker News Board

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#101

Post by jclardy » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:43 PM UTC

penagwin wrote: post #7

alunchbox wrote: post #5

Hmm. Would it be possible to run these Apps in a VM like container? allow it access a dummy, empty folder to read from somewhat of a container for all apps? then there would be a manual transfer process between the shared folders after you've saved an image? So when downloading an App it will ask would you want to run this in an isolated environment? and you can, so if it tries to scan over your photo gallery it will…

This is a scoping issue. On iOS devices at least no app has access to your photo gallery unless they explicitly prompt you for permission. That said, many apps need access to the photo gallery - say I want to put a screenshot into discord. The issue is that now Discord has access to ALL of my photos. There needs to be more scoping options. "Allow access to previous 12 photos while you're using the app" kinda deal.

Or make it even simpler - split read and write access. Camera/Photos are already split, but I should have the ability to let an app save a photo without having to grant it complete access to my photo library.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#102

Post by pbhjpbhj » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:44 PM UTC

godelski wrote: post #44

stunt wrote: post #16

The coverage on FaceApp and the way they talk about it is ridiculous. When it comes for instance to Snapchat's numbers, the coverage is about the success of the company. How is FaceApp different than all other apps and social networks that are storing all your photos with location and tags to your friends except that FaceApp is a Russian company? I'm not defending FaceApp. I don't use social networks either for the s…

One people brush off and another people don't. So if you want to teach people about how and why data is important it is easier to do so when using Russia an an example (assuming you're a Westerner). Most people still have a fair amount of trust in US companies and don't believe they would abuse their power. Call it tribalism it whatever, but that's how it is. But to us in tech it's pretty obvious that even if Snapcha…

It's because Russia has been demonised in USA's propaganda over decades. They're selling trying to do the same with China now, except it's more for direct commercial reasons than to protect the ideal of Capitalism as it was before.

I grew up getting a lot of "evil commies" messages in US American media and I'm not even in USA (I'm from UK).

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#103

Post by londons_explore » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:44 PM UTC

I wonder if a neural network could be trained to recognise people who "look honest" or who "look like they'll repay their loans" (aka, profitable credit scoring data).

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#104

Post by jclardy » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:46 PM UTC

eswat wrote: post #87

ajconway wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On iOS is't possible to ask the system to present a photo picker on behalf of the app without requiring a permission to look into your photos.

So I’ve heard about this feature before but I’m not sure it actually exists? From the Photos app you can only share specific photos with specific apps that add themselves to the popout menu. If you disable Photos access to any of these apps they will just ask that you re-enable full photo access.

It does exist, I have an app that manipulates photos and if you reject photos permission you can still use the photo picker and get access to one photo of the user's choice. You can't directly save to the photos library, but you can save it via a system share sheet.

Most apps don't make that obvious though, and imply that they need full photos access to work (Or they don't give options to use the system picker/system share sheet.)

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#105

Post by sergiotapia » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #68

sergiotapia wrote: post #50

>To make FaceApp actually work, you have to give it permissions to access your photos - ALL of them. But it also gains access to Siri and Search .... Oh, and it has access to refreshing in the background - so even when you are not using it, it is using you. This is false, you can just take a pic and never give it access to your gallery. If the authors are lying about something so trivial, what else do journalists lie…

Is this true for both iOS and Android? It probably needs access to media to store images, and once you grant it that level of access, it can read media as well.

I speak for Android. It asked me for camera access, but if I want to "oldify" my gallery pics, it asks for a different set of permissions (which I deny).

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#106

Post by pbhjpbhj » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #20

We keep harping on about privacy, and then shit like this happens. There are two possible conclusions to draw. One is that the general public actually doesn’t care about privacy at all. It’s a niche concern. The other is that the general public cares but is completely and utterly clueless about how to defend themselves, to the point that an app can literally say “give us your name and face and we can do whatever we w…

Bit if A, bit of B.

People don't care that much, but also don't realise the implications that would make them care marginally more in some instances.

Google already have millions of face tags from Picasa, etc.; Facebook has had image tagging for ages; ... governments already have all that data from passports and driving licensee and ID cards ... so why not give it up again. It's a drop in the ocean situation.

Russia having my face data is likely to make much less difference to me than someone in UK having it, which might also make people not care. [But of course they can sell the data on.]

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#107

Post by mikeash » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:50 PM UTC

hanniabu wrote: post #83

sailingparrot wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Option 3: No one read the terms of services, and 99% of the app users are not even aware of that, didn't even give it a passing thought.

There should be a rule that if a ToS is longer than 200 words then it requires a bullet point summary list at the top.

The trouble is, what happens when the summary is inaccurate or incomplete? If the summary takes precedence in that case, then the full ToS is meaningless and can be omitted, so you could simplify this to a rule requiring ToSs to be under 200 words. If the ToS takes precedence then the summary is meaningless.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#108

Post by skizm » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:51 PM UTC

idop wrote: post #72

skizm wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What argument do you use to prove them wrong?

I usually say something to the tune of "everyone has something to hide, that's why we put clothes on; that's why we don't go around broadcasting our medical test results; that's why we don't reveal our salaries and benefits to our colleagues (or anyone); that's why we don't give our address to anyone that asks for it. It doesn't mean we've done something bad or we're criminals, it just means we're human. But if you h…

These arguments are exactly why most people I meet say they don't care how much info they give to random apps. They assume since Google has all the info already anyway, why should they care if one more nameless faceless corp gets it? Plus companies have had all this personal data for a long time now and nothing bad has happened.

The only argument I've had even a little success with is "it makes it easier for identity thieves to get and use your CC / bank info". That usually get a pause before "oh well my bank has fraud protection".

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#109

Post by slg » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:52 PM UTC

Can someone explain how a company can claim the uploader gave them a license to an image when they do nothing to check if the person uploading the image had ownership in the first place? I have seen plenty of examples of people using the FaceApp on famous people with some image that the uploader clearly doesn't own.

Furthermore, don't people have rights over their likeness that overruled certain rights the copyright holder has over the image? For example, I would own the copyright if I met some celebrity on the street and took their photo. That doesn't mean I can freely use that image in my advertising.

Re: FaceApp Now Owns Access to More Than 150M People's Faces and Names

#110

Post by cmiles74 » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:53 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #20

We keep harping on about privacy, and then shit like this happens. There are two possible conclusions to draw. One is that the general public actually doesn’t care about privacy at all. It’s a niche concern. The other is that the general public cares but is completely and utterly clueless about how to defend themselves, to the point that an app can literally say “give us your name and face and we can do whatever we w…

The general public didn't know that the application was saying "give us your name and face and we can do whatever we want with it..." They had no idea that this was even a thing.

I would bet hard earned money that the average person installed this application because a friend told them and they were curious. This bit about what happens to their image and what data does the app save locally verses pushing out to the network, etc. is something that never even crossed their mind. If there was a window with legalese they ignored it as they have been trained to do (by Microsoft, Apple and every other commercial software product they ever purchased). Certainly they didn't go clicking around and looking for it.