FACEBOOK
DOCUMENTS SHOW FACEBOOK USED USER DATA AS A COMPETIVE WEAPON
Internal Facebook documents released by a U.K. parliamentary committee offer the clearest evidence yet that the social network has used its enormous trove of user data as a competitive weapon, often in ways designed to keep its users in the dark.
December 06, 2018Parliament's media committee accused Facebook on Wednesday of cutting special deals with some app developers to give them more access to data, while icing out others that it viewed as potential rivals.
In other documents, company executives discussed how they were keeping the company's collection and exploitation of user data from its users. That included quietly collecting the call records and text messages of users of phones that run on Google's Android operating system without asking their permission.
The U.K. committee released more than 200 pages of documents on the tech giant's internal discussions about the value of users' personal information. While they mostly cover the period between 2012 and 2015 —the first three years after Facebook went public — they offer a rare glimpse into the company's inner workings and the extent to which it used people's data to make money while publicly vowing to protect their privacy.
The company's critics said the new revelations reinforced their concerns over what users actually know about how Facebook treats their data. "These kinds of schemes are exactly why companies must be required to disclose exactly how they are collecting and sharing our data, with stiff penalties for companies that lie about it," Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said in a statement.
Facebook called the documents misleading and said the information they contain is "only part of the story." "Like any business, we had many internal conversations about the various ways we could build a sustainable business model for our platform," the company said in a statement. "But the facts are clear: We've never sold people's data."
Internal Facebook documents released by a U.K. parliamentary committee offer the clearest evidence yet that the social network has used its enormous trove of user data as a competitive weapon, often in ways designed to keep its users in the dark.
December 06, 2018Parliament's media committee accused Facebook on Wednesday of cutting special deals with some app developers to give them more access to data, while icing out others that it viewed as potential rivals.
In other documents, company executives discussed how they were keeping the company's collection and exploitation of user data from its users. That included quietly collecting the call records and text messages of users of phones that run on Google's Android operating system without asking their permission.
The U.K. committee released more than 200 pages of documents on the tech giant's internal discussions about the value of users' personal information. While they mostly cover the period between 2012 and 2015 —the first three years after Facebook went public — they offer a rare glimpse into the company's inner workings and the extent to which it used people's data to make money while publicly vowing to protect their privacy.
The company's critics said the new revelations reinforced their concerns over what users actually know about how Facebook treats their data. "These kinds of schemes are exactly why companies must be required to disclose exactly how they are collecting and sharing our data, with stiff penalties for companies that lie about it," Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said in a statement.
Facebook called the documents misleading and said the information they contain is "only part of the story." "Like any business, we had many internal conversations about the various ways we could build a sustainable business model for our platform," the company said in a statement. "But the facts are clear: We've never sold people's data."
In a Facebook post , company CEO Mark Zuckerberg sought to put the documents in context. "Of course, we don't let everyone develop on our platform," he wrote. "We blocked a lot of sketchy apps. We also didn't allow developers to use our platform to replicate our functionality or grow their services virally in a way that creates little value for people on Facebook."
The U.K. committee seized the documents from app developer Six4Three, maker of a now-defunct bikini-picture search app. Six4Three acquired the files as part of a U.S. lawsuit that accuses Facebook of deceptive, anti-competitive business practices. The documents remain under court seal in the U.S.
In a summary of key issues pertaining to the documents, the committee said Facebook "whitelisted," or made exceptions for companies such as Airbnb and Netflix, that gave them continued access to users' "friends" even after the tech giant announced changes in 2015 to end the practice.
"Facebook have clearly entered into whitelisting agreements with certain companies, which meant that after the platform changes in 2014/15 they maintained full access to friends data," the committee said in a statement. "It is not clear that there was any user consent for this, nor how Facebook decided which companies should be whitelisted or not."
The documents "raise important questions about how Facebook treats users' data, their policies for working with app developers, and how they exercise their dominant position in the social media market," said committee chair Damian Collins. "We don't feel we have had straight answers from Facebook on these important issues, which is why we are releasing the documents."
The U.K. committee seized the documents from app developer Six4Three, maker of a now-defunct bikini-picture search app. Six4Three acquired the files as part of a U.S. lawsuit that accuses Facebook of deceptive, anti-competitive business practices. The documents remain under court seal in the U.S.
In a summary of key issues pertaining to the documents, the committee said Facebook "whitelisted," or made exceptions for companies such as Airbnb and Netflix, that gave them continued access to users' "friends" even after the tech giant announced changes in 2015 to end the practice.
"Facebook have clearly entered into whitelisting agreements with certain companies, which meant that after the platform changes in 2014/15 they maintained full access to friends data," the committee said in a statement. "It is not clear that there was any user consent for this, nor how Facebook decided which companies should be whitelisted or not."
The documents "raise important questions about how Facebook treats users' data, their policies for working with app developers, and how they exercise their dominant position in the social media market," said committee chair Damian Collins. "We don't feel we have had straight answers from Facebook on these important issues, which is why we are releasing the documents."
he cache includes emails from Zuckerberg and other key members of his staff. The emails show Zuckerberg and other executives scheming to leverage user data to favor companies not considered to be threats and to identify potential acquisitions.
Collins said the emails raise important issues, particularly around the use of the data of Facebook users. "The idea of linking access to friends' data to the financial value of the developers' relationship with Facebook is a recurring feature of the documents," Collins said.
The committee's summary said Facebook collected data about the mobile apps its users favored to help it decide which companies to acquire. It also said Facebook knew that an update to its Android mobile app phone system — which allowed the Facebook app to hoover up user call logs and text messages — would be controversial.
"To mitigate any bad PR, Facebook planned to make it as hard as possible for users to know that this was one of the underlying features of the upgrade of their app," the summary said. In a post Wednesday, Facebook continued to stand by its stance that the feature was "is opt in for users and we ask for people's permission before enabling."
The Android data collection practice was unearthed in April as the Cambridge Analytica scandal roiled Facebook. The data mining firm, employed by the 2016 Trump campaign, exploited lax Facebook data-sharing policies to obtain data on millions of users without their consent.
Facebook executives clearly understand the material is valuable. An unsigned memo setting policy for a system upgrade known as "Platform 3.0" laid out a case for shutting out any app developer who could be construed as a competitor.
Collins said the emails raise important issues, particularly around the use of the data of Facebook users. "The idea of linking access to friends' data to the financial value of the developers' relationship with Facebook is a recurring feature of the documents," Collins said.
The committee's summary said Facebook collected data about the mobile apps its users favored to help it decide which companies to acquire. It also said Facebook knew that an update to its Android mobile app phone system — which allowed the Facebook app to hoover up user call logs and text messages — would be controversial.
"To mitigate any bad PR, Facebook planned to make it as hard as possible for users to know that this was one of the underlying features of the upgrade of their app," the summary said. In a post Wednesday, Facebook continued to stand by its stance that the feature was "is opt in for users and we ask for people's permission before enabling."
The Android data collection practice was unearthed in April as the Cambridge Analytica scandal roiled Facebook. The data mining firm, employed by the 2016 Trump campaign, exploited lax Facebook data-sharing policies to obtain data on millions of users without their consent.
Facebook executives clearly understand the material is valuable. An unsigned memo setting policy for a system upgrade known as "Platform 3.0" laid out a case for shutting out any app developer who could be construed as a competitor.
"There are a small number of developers whom no amount of sharing to FB or monetary value can justify giving them access to Platform," the memo said. "These developers do not want to participate in the ecosystem we have created, but rather build their own ecosystem at the expense of our users, other developers and, of course, us. That is something that we will not allow."
The documents also suggest Facebook would jealously safeguard its interests. In a January 2013 email exchange, Zuckerberg signed off on cutting access to Twitter's Vine video-producing app, which had allowed users to find their friends on Vine by pulling in data from Facebook.
"Unless anyone raises objections," Facebook Vice President Justin Osofsky wrote, the company would cut Vine's access to users' friend networks. "We're prepared reactive PR." "Yup, go for it," Zuckerberg replied.
The documents also suggest robust internal discussions about linking data to revenue. "There's a big question on where we get the revenue from," Zuckerberg said in one email. "Do we make it easy for (developers) to use our payments/ad network but not require them? Do we require them? Do we just charge a (revenue) share directly and let (developers) who use them get a credit against what they owe us? It's not at all clear to me here that we have a model that will actually make us the revenue we want at scale."
The documents also suggest Facebook would jealously safeguard its interests. In a January 2013 email exchange, Zuckerberg signed off on cutting access to Twitter's Vine video-producing app, which had allowed users to find their friends on Vine by pulling in data from Facebook.
"Unless anyone raises objections," Facebook Vice President Justin Osofsky wrote, the company would cut Vine's access to users' friend networks. "We're prepared reactive PR." "Yup, go for it," Zuckerberg replied.
The documents also suggest robust internal discussions about linking data to revenue. "There's a big question on where we get the revenue from," Zuckerberg said in one email. "Do we make it easy for (developers) to use our payments/ad network but not require them? Do we require them? Do we just charge a (revenue) share directly and let (developers) who use them get a credit against what they owe us? It's not at all clear to me here that we have a model that will actually make us the revenue we want at scale."
FACEBOOK LET COMPANIES READ AND DELETE YOUR PRIVATE MESSAGES
By David Gilbert Dec 19, 2018
“We don’t sell data to anyone,” Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told Congress in April. What he didn't mention is that Facebook gives data away via secret deals with some of Silicon Valley’s biggest players — often without consent, according to a New York Times investigation published Tuesday.
Based on hundreds of internal Facebook documents, the report provides an inside look at the intrusive access provided to select partners — including Netflix, Microsoft, Spotify, Amazon and Apple — by the social network.
The revelations also highlight once again the company’s lack of transparency and accountability when it comes to the collection, process and sharing of user data. The documents show that Facebook gave partners the ability to read, write and delete messages, as well as access the names and contact details of friends — all without explicit consent.
Facebook has denied it has done anything wrong, saying there is no evidence the data has been misused.
The company has repeatedly claimed that following previous privacy scandals it instituted much stricter privacy policies, something Zuckerberg alluded to when he told Congress that users “have complete control” over everything they share on Facebook.
“We don’t sell data to anyone,” Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told Congress in April. What he didn't mention is that Facebook gives data away via secret deals with some of Silicon Valley’s biggest players — often without consent, according to a New York Times investigation published Tuesday.
Based on hundreds of internal Facebook documents, the report provides an inside look at the intrusive access provided to select partners — including Netflix, Microsoft, Spotify, Amazon and Apple — by the social network.
The revelations also highlight once again the company’s lack of transparency and accountability when it comes to the collection, process and sharing of user data. The documents show that Facebook gave partners the ability to read, write and delete messages, as well as access the names and contact details of friends — all without explicit consent.
Facebook has denied it has done anything wrong, saying there is no evidence the data has been misused.
The company has repeatedly claimed that following previous privacy scandals it instituted much stricter privacy policies, something Zuckerberg alluded to when he told Congress that users “have complete control” over everything they share on Facebook.
Alex Stamos✔@alexstamos
This isn't a good response from Facebook to the NY Times story, because it makes the same mistake of blending all kinds of different integrations and models into a bunch of prose and it is very hard to match up the responses to the Times' claims.
.https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/12/facebooks-partners/ …
296
2:50 AM - Dec 19, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Let’s Clear Up a Few Things About Facebook’s Partners | Facebook NewsroomWe're facing questions about whether Facebook gave large tech companies access to people's information and, if so, why we did this.
newsroom.fb.com
149 people are talking about this
The Times investigation suggests these promises have not been kept, which could lead to legal problems for the company.
“If the allegations are true, Facebook may face a colossal volume of individual and collective lawsuits demanding billions in damages, let alone sanctions imposed by regulators from all around the world,” Ilia Kolochenko, CEO of web security company High-Tech Bridge, told VICE News.
Facebook signed a consent agreement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2011, barring the social network from sharing user data without explicit permission. The company says its data deals did not breach that agreement because they viewed their partners as extensions of the company, experts disagree.
“If the allegations are true, Facebook may face a colossal volume of individual and collective lawsuits demanding billions in damages, let alone sanctions imposed by regulators from all around the world,” Ilia Kolochenko, CEO of web security company High-Tech Bridge, told VICE News.
Facebook signed a consent agreement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2011, barring the social network from sharing user data without explicit permission. The company says its data deals did not breach that agreement because they viewed their partners as extensions of the company, experts disagree.
“This is just giving third parties permission to harvest data without you being informed of it or giving consent to it,” David Vladeck, who previously ran the FTC’s consumer protection bureau, told the Times. “I don’t understand how this unconsented to data harvesting can at all be justified under the consent decree.”
The FTC opened an investigation into whether or not Facebook is complying with the consent decree earlier this year. The investigation is ongoing.
HERE’S HOW FACEBOOK IS GIVING AWAY YOUR DATA:
The FTC opened an investigation into whether or not Facebook is complying with the consent decree earlier this year. The investigation is ongoing.
HERE’S HOW FACEBOOK IS GIVING AWAY YOUR DATA:
- Yahoo struck a deal giving it the ability to display a Facebook user’s news feed — including friends’ posts — on the search company’s homepage. Yahoo got rid of the feature in 2012. But as of last year, it still had access to data for close to 100,000 people a month.
- Spotify, Netflix and the Royal Bank of Canada signed a contract allowing them to read, write and delete users’ private messages, and to see all participants on a thread. The companies said they were unaware they had such broad powers.
- Amazon was permitted to obtain users’ names and contact information through their friends. As of last year, the documents show Amazon could access Facebook users emails through their friends. In exchange, Facebook was given access to contact lists from the e-commerce giant to gain deeper insight into people’s relationships and suggest more connections.
- Apple was given special powers to hide the fact it was asking for users’ Facebook data. iPhones and iPads also had access to the contact numbers and calendar entries of people who had changed their account settings to disable all sharing, the records show. Apple claims it was not aware of the broad powers Facebook granted it and said any personal information never left the devices.
FASCEBOOK
