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

Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

news10.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 250 posts

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#241

Post by superuser2 »

eric_h wrote: post #240
superuser2 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if the app is certificate pinning (and from a security perspective, it ought to).

Is this a common thing for apps to do, yet? I was under the impression that there are some corporate networks which treat MitMing ssl connections as a business necessity. Would Facebook et. al. allow their apps to stop functioning on networks like that?

I can't imagine an enterprise which would MITM employee web browsing but not block Facebook. Come to think of it, I can't imagine an enterprise that would MITM employee web traffic but allow personal smartphones on the network.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#242

Post by eric_h »

superuser2 wrote: post #241
eric_h wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a common thing for apps to do, yet? I was under the impression that there are some corporate networks which treat MitMing ssl connections as a business necessity. Would Facebook et. al. allow their apps to stop functioning on networks like that?

I can't imagine an enterprise which would MITM employee web browsing but not block Facebook. Come to think of it, I can't imagine an enterprise that would MITM employee web traffic but allow personal smartphones on the network.

Ha. Yes, fair enough. But, presuming they didn't, would it not be in facebook's best interest to allow their app to still work, perhaps with a visible warning?

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#243

Post by psc »

dahart wrote: post #223
koyote wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very off-topic but what is your real-world use case for such an app? The site lists a couple but most of those seem to make more sense when using a recording app in the traditional, explicit, way (e.g. "we are having a meeting, I will record this meeting").

I've often been in meetings I wish I'd have recorded but didn't think about it until too late. For that matter, I'd love the same concept with video, if there was a way to always record what I'm seeing without having to think about it in advance or wear a camera on my face, to capture anything interesting that happens to me, I'd be interested. I remember a story about an exec at Microsoft installing implants in his h…

> I'm terrified of anyone but me having access to this kind of data, though. It's nobody's business but mine.

This is by far the biggest problem with this kind of tech. If there were a way to guarantee the privacy of the recordings, it would be a super useful tool. You could basically have a perfect photographic memory. Not to mention all the cool processing you can do with the data. The idea really excites me, but equally terrifies me.

But I think given enough time and progress in encryption/speech recognition/legal issues, I think something like this is inevitable. It's hard to see a future where we record less. I think another key part is having access to data of you. That way you don't feel like it's being recorded to be used "against" you.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#244

Post by Karlozkiller »

krupan wrote: post #192
Karlozkiller wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The android app asks for microphone privilege as of a few years back when they introduced the listen-in feature. The problem here to me, is that when they add the voluntary feature they force everyone to give the app all the permissions needed as well. By doing this your phone has no way of stopping the app from misbehaving as it has given permission for it to do so. At least that was the case when the feature came o…

Yes, android 6 now asks you about each permission the first time an app tries to do something that requires that permission.

However at least on my Cyanogenmod device I've experienced apps breaking 100% if you deny it a permission. Even if that permission should not be vital to the functioning of the app.

It's great that you can filter permissions, but when you suddenly can't use basic functionality because the programmers added obligatory geolocation to a feature, then you don't have much choice. Remove the app, or allow it to track you.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#246

Post by astazangasta »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #237
astazangasta wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it helpful to have a computer tell me who I should be friends with?

It's not telling you. Telling you would be automatically making you friends. It's a suggestion based on factors along a social graph. If it's right, great! Saved you time from searching, or nudged you to create a stronger communications channel than you previously had (ostensibly). If it's wrong, you just ignore it.

>If it's right, great! Saved you time from searching, or nudged you to create a stronger communications channel than you previously had

This is a tiny, tiny good I never wanted that I am receiving in exchange for a massive surveillance apparatus profiling my entire internet life.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#247

Post by renaudg »

DavidSJ wrote: post #65
HappyTypist wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I work for Facebook. This doesn't happen.

I doubt that it happens myself, but out of curiosity, are you saying this because you are in a privileged position to know for sure that Facebook doesn't do this, or are you saying this based on your experience of the corporate culture?

I also used to be an engineer at Facebook.

Definitely the corporate culture wouldn't allow anything like this. Believe it or not, many FB engineers have some kind of free software / civil liberties background in their past, and most people don't seem to realize that A) they have options, they can and would walk out if they witnessed anything shady B) the company has enough fake scandals wound up by the press as it is, to risk doing something genuinely evil for short term gain, and have a former employee eventually blow the whistle on.

One controversy after the other, during my time at Facebook I witnessed the chasm between the mostly innocent motivations behind a product feature, and what the press / outside world made of it. This experience probably taught me as much about media cycles and conspiracy theory dynamics, as it did about engineering.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#248

Post by renaudg »

anysz wrote: post #128
nutmeg wrote: post #116

Another anecdotal-data-of-sample-size-one, my wife was at a bar and struck up a conversation with another person to whom she had no connections. After she left, Facebook suggested this person as a friend. The other person may have searched for her on Facebook, causing her to be listed as a possible friend. Or perhaps Facebook uses location data to group people that are in the same location for an extended period of t…

+1 This happened to me at the supermarket. Super cute cashier girl. No idea what her name is. As I'm heading out I open up my news feed and what do you know? There she is in recommended friends. WTF

Could you and the girl have shared the same IP address at some point (because of store Wi-Fi, or CGNAT with your cell carrier) ?

Disclaimer : I'm a former FB engineer but have no specific knowledge of this area. I suspect that IP addresses could be used as input for the PYMK feature though (in the absence of anything better, as you had 0 friends), as they are for security systems.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#249

Post by renaudg »

haukilup wrote: post #195
HappyTypist wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineers have access to code repositories.

Oh cool! So based on your comments, you've done an audit of all related code repositories and libraries to confirm? I'm sure a Facebook engineer COULD find out if Facebook is doing this - but just working at Facebook is not sufficient enough to say for certain it does not happen, you need to actually do the required investigation. --- I don't personally think Facebook is listening in the way suggested here, key word…

I used to work there a while (5 years) ago, and I don't think you understand how this company works.

There are internal groups where features are discussed and debated all the time, and even all hands Q&A sessions with Zuck (weekly IIRC) where sometimes hard questions are raised.

Someone amongst the many engineers with access to the repo will eventually end up spotting shady code if it exists. They might raise this with a colleague first, or in an internal group, and the matter might even bubble up to the Zuck Q&A if it's intentional and particularly controversial.

This level of internal openness is unusual at this company size, and since there are people joining & leaving all the time (including interns who AFAIK have the same level of access to the code) it would take just ONE disgruntled whistleblower to ignite a scandal that the press will be instantly all over like piranhas smelling blood, this being Facebook.

Therefore, doing evil covertly like you suggest just isn't worth the risk for FB, period. Not happening, won't happen. When you see headlines like "Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?", Occam's razor is always your best friend.

Re: Is Facebook eavesdropping on phone conversations?

#250

Post by tuxracer »

dave2000 wrote: post #11
tuxracer wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you RTFA you'd see the claim is that Facebook is activating the microphone to listen to non-electronic verbal communication you're having nearby your phone.

You're missing the point. It doesn't matter at all if there's any evidence that a given claim about a particular version of an app is being tapped; you have to assume that they all are, all the time, and act accordingly. You're never going to know, and certainly not ahead of time; best to assume they're all tapped. Which, as we all know post-Snowden, is the only reasonable assumption.

Most people are aware at this point that non-end-to-end encrypted electronic conversation is being tapped. It seems like a new development to extend that assumption to non-electronic verbal communication you're having with another person physically in the same room as you. Again, communication not occurring via any electronic means whatsoever. Just so happens your phone was in your pocket while you were non-electronically verbally communicating with someone physically sitting in front of you.
Post reply on HN