41–50 of 148 posts
There's such a beautiful irony in reading about unfettered data mining on a website (theverge.com) which connects to *37* third-party domains when displaying the article: 1. ak.sail-horizon.com 2. amazon-adsystem.com 3. api.parsely.com 4. c.amazon-adsystem.com 5. cdn.concert.io 6. concert.io 7. coral.coralproject.net 8. coralproject.net 9. csp.withgoogle.com 10. d35xxde4fgg0cx.cloudfront.net 11. duet-cdn.vox-cdn.com…
This is depressing, but of even more concern is the fact that this data (and other, perhaps more "important" data) is available to essentially anyone with enough money to pay for it. This obviously includes most governments. I'm fairly sure the data brokers are not too picky about how they get paid. There has to be regulation at the federal level to stop such practices. Nothing else will do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Update: Having poked around my own FB privacy report, Consumer Reports is clearly using the data available in the "Advertisers using your activity or information" report. There are a ton of random companies on here, but it's important to note that this is NOT data being sent to FB as the report implies. This particular report is just the number of times I have been matched to an uploaded list - the uploading company…
How is “they sent facebook a list with my name on it, and facebook showed me their records showing I was on their list” compatible with the statement “this is NOT data being sent to FB”?!?
> Advertisers may get information from you (like your email address) when you interact with them outside of Facebook, like if you make a purchase in their store or create an account for a rewards program. They can create a hashed list with that information and upload it to Facebook. We can match users using the list to help the advertiser reach people who may be interested in their business and without Facebook learning any new identifying information about you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess FB tracking pixels will no longer work when third-party cookies are removed from browsers. That seems like a massive hit for them if I understand it correctly (and a big W for us)
Yes and no. FB's tracking pixel can be both first and third party: https://www.facebook.com/business/help/471978536642445?id=12... Getting rid of third-party support will mean FB doesn't get anonymous data from random website users - but if you are logged into FB or hit the page from a FB link, it would still be trackable as a first-party cookie.
There's such a beautiful irony in reading about unfettered data mining on a website (theverge.com) which connects to *37* third-party domains when displaying the article: 1. ak.sail-horizon.com 2. amazon-adsystem.com 3. api.parsely.com 4. c.amazon-adsystem.com 5. cdn.concert.io 6. concert.io 7. coral.coralproject.net 8. coralproject.net 9. csp.withgoogle.com 10. d35xxde4fgg0cx.cloudfront.net 11. duet-cdn.vox-cdn.com…
In terms of tracking double/quadruple etc counting the same company isn’t meaningful. So, once you start noticing it the list seems significantly shorter than it actually is (2. amazon-adsystem.com vs 4. c.amazon-adsystem.com). Worse, 5 of them are the same domain with www. in front (12. google.com and 32. www.google.com) which most people subconsciously see as the same thing.
Therefore, a slightly curated list comes off as more impactful:
1 amazon-adsystem.com 2 concert.io 3 coralproject.net 4 d35xxde4fgg0cx.cloudfront.net 5 google.com 6 memberful.com 7 moatads.com 8 narrativ.com 9 parsely.com 10 polyfill.io 11 rubiconproject.com 12 sail-horizon.com 13 sentry.io 14 vox-cdn.com 15 z.moatads.com
PS: I mean Google representing 10 domains on your list does say something, but it’s only tangential to tracking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes and no. FB's tracking pixel can be both first and third party: https://www.facebook.com/business/help/471978536642445?id=12... Getting rid of third-party support will mean FB doesn't get anonymous data from random website users - but if you are logged into FB or hit the page from a FB link, it would still be trackable as a first-party cookie.
Don't tracking pixels also work without cookies or Javascript though? If you have an ` ` on your website or app, the server that houses that URL gets a ton of info on you from the HTTP request header data. Less useful without the cookie but still something.
Link to the actual Consumer Reports report: https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/privacy/each-fac... So most of the data provided is probably coming in via the FB tracking pixel. I think the references to FB's "custom audiences" is a red herring - it's a very manual process and very few companies use that feature in any sort of scale. FB hashes the data that gets uploaded and specifically throws out extraneous…
Has anyone tried doing a deep dive on their own data from FB? Is it fairly accessible to crunch this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Update: Having poked around my own FB privacy report, Consumer Reports is clearly using the data available in the "Advertisers using your activity or information" report. There are a ton of random companies on here, but it's important to note that this is NOT data being sent to FB as the report implies. This particular report is just the number of times I have been matched to an uploaded list - the uploading company…
How is “they sent facebook a list with my name on it, and facebook showed me their records showing I was on their list” compatible with the statement “this is NOT data being sent to FB”?!?
Earlier today, this[1] was on the HN front page, a blog post on how Meta processes trillions of serverless functions. All that impressive tech exists for one single reason - massive surveillance at scale. [1] https://read.engineerscodex.com/p/meta-xfaas-serverless-func...