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

Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

malwarebytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 236 posts

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#81

Post by echoangle »

HeavyStorm wrote: post #77
gruez wrote: post #72

As much as I don't like facebook as a company, I think the jury reached the wrong decision here. If you read the complaint[1], "eavesdropped on and/or recorded their conversations by using an electronic device" basically amounted to "flo using facebook's sdk and sending custom events to it" (page 12, point 49). I agree that flo should be raked over the coals for sending this information to facebook in the first place…

That's why in these cases you'd prefer a judgment without a jury. Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors, who can't be expected to understand details about sdk, data sharing, APIs etc. On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level.

Is it easier for the prosecution to make the jury think Facebook is guilty or for Facebook to make the jury think they are not? I don’t see why one would be easier, except if the jury would be prejudiced against Facebook already. Or is it just luck who the jury sides with?

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#82

Post by raverbashing »

PunchTornado wrote: post #53
comrade1234 wrote: post #17

I don't think many of you read the article... the Flo app is the one in the wrong here, not meta. The app people were sending user data to meta with no restrictions on its use. Despite however the court ruled.

> The app people were sending user data to meta with no restrictions on its use And then meta accessed it. So unless you put restrictions on data, meta is going to access it. Don't you think it should be the other way around? Meta to ask for permission? Then we wouldn't have this sort of thing.

Here's the restriction: don't send it to fb in the first place!

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#85

Post by azemetre »

echoangle wrote: post #81
HeavyStorm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why in these cases you'd prefer a judgment without a jury. Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors, who can't be expected to understand details about sdk, data sharing, APIs etc. On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level.

Is it easier for the prosecution to make the jury think Facebook is guilty or for Facebook to make the jury think they are not? I don’t see why one would be easier, except if the jury would be prejudiced against Facebook already. Or is it just luck who the jury sides with?

I mean it totally depends what your views on democracy are. Juries are one of the few, likely only, practices taken from Ancient Athenian democracy which was truly led by the people. The fact that juries still work this way is a testament to the practice.

With this in mind, I personally believe groups will always come to better conclusions than individuals.

Being tried by 12 instead of 1 means more diversity of thought and opinion.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#87

Post by _fat_santa »

My wife uses Flo though every time I see her open the app and input information the tech side of my brain is quite alarmed. An app like that keeps very very personal information and really highlights for me the need to educate non-technical folks on information security.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#88

Post by dylan604 »

echoangle wrote: post #81
HeavyStorm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why in these cases you'd prefer a judgment without a jury. Technical cases like this will always confuse jurors, who can't be expected to understand details about sdk, data sharing, APIs etc. On the other hand, in a number of highprofile tech cases, you can see judges learning and discussing engineering in a deeper level.

Is it easier for the prosecution to make the jury think Facebook is guilty or for Facebook to make the jury think they are not? I don’t see why one would be easier, except if the jury would be prejudiced against Facebook already. Or is it just luck who the jury sides with?

I'd imagine Facebook looking for any potential juror in tech to be dismissed as quickly as possible while the prosecution would be looking to seat as many tech jurors they can luck their way into seating.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#89

Post by benreesman »

gruez wrote: post #72

As much as I don't like facebook as a company, I think the jury reached the wrong decision here. If you read the complaint[1], "eavesdropped on and/or recorded their conversations by using an electronic device" basically amounted to "flo using facebook's sdk and sending custom events to it" (page 12, point 49). I agree that flo should be raked over the coals for sending this information to facebook in the first place…

I tend to agree in this instance. But this is why you don't build a public brand of doing shit very much like this constantly.

Innocent until proven guilty is the right default, but at some point when you've been accused of misconduct enough times? No jury is impartial.

Re: Meta accessed women's health data from Flo app without consent, says court

#90

Post by dylan604 »

akudha wrote: post #51
Dylan16807 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All they need to do is impose a three digit fine per affected user and Facebook will immediately feel intense pressure.

$1 for the first user, $2 for second, $4 for third...By the 30th user, it would be painful even for mega corps. By 40th, it would be an absurd number. Might also be worth trying to force them to display a banner on every page of the site "you're on facebook, you have no privacy here", like those warnings on cigarette boxes. These might not work though, people would just see and ignore them, just like smokers ignore w…

But these users were NOT on Facebook. It was an app using the FB SDK. So it should be the apps that use SDKs should put up large banners clearly identifying who they are sharing data with. Some of these sites are sharing with >100 3rd party sites. It is outrageous
Post reply on HN