12 ms·

Zuckerberg denies knowledge of Facebook shadow profiles

201 points by peterkelly 9y ago

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
paulie_a 9y ago
TLDR: Zuckerberg continues to lie to Congress
- dang 9y ago
  This comment breaks the site guidelines. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all. You may not owe better to Zuckerberg but you do owe better to the community here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - paulie_a 9y ago
    I am sorry to summarize that a billionaire is an outright liar in a congressional hearing. There is no other way to put it. He might as well say "I am not a crook"
johnchristopher 9y ago
> Lujan: It may surprise you that we’ve not talked about this a lot today. You’ve said everyone controls their data, but you’re collecting data on people who are not even Facebook users who have never signed a consent, a privacy agreement. > And it may surprise you that on Facebook’s page when you go to “I don’t have a Facebook account and would like to request all my personal data stored by Facebook” it takes you to a form that says “go to your Facebook page and then on your account settings you can download your data.” This is typically something Facebook should be prepared for considering it's one of the use case of the GDPR. It's highly likely they are prepared for that but won't show it before the storm.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- TAForObvReasons 9y ago
  WOW they are discussing the FB trackers now. This may actually get real
  - fastball 9y ago
    Yeah, Congresswoman Dingell is laying it down. She even specifically mentioned the Facebook "pixel" in a technically accurate way!
    - scoggs 9y ago
      I'm not sure if she's technically savvy enough to have known that or researched it on her own but if not I'm really glad her interns or subordinates were focused on important talking points that will really help define the problems at hand.
      - Waterluvian 9y ago
        Agreed. Its absolutely not her role to be a specialist. Her role is policy and lawmaking. A good Congressperson would be one who can wield the full force of their team's knowledge and research power.
        noir_lord 9y ago
        > A good Congressperson would be one who can wield the full force of their team's knowledge and research power. In practice I fear it's more that a 'good' (electable) congressperson is the one who can wield the full force of their lobbiest's knowledge and power. I try hard not to be cynical but as a citizen of the UK the soft control the private sector has over our government is horribly worrying.
    - artursapek 9y ago
      However, she focused on statistics, not intent behind those things - what type of data FB collects and why. She was almost there but sort of wasted the opportunity.
danschumann 9y ago
He also denied knowing the political orientation of his content police(during yesterday's Cruz question), however, he's Facebook, so he knows everyone's political biases.
- fra 9y ago
  Are you seriously suggesting Facebook use it's employee's private account data as part of hiring & performance management?
  - testvox 9y ago
    Why would they not? Any other employer is allowed to, so why not Facebook?
    - fra 9y ago
      Facebook has a different level of access. Seems to me like that would be all kinds of unethical.
      - einr 9y ago
        And clearly, Facebook would not use personal information for unethical purposes.
    - heartbreak 9y ago
      Because the liability is not worth it.
    - reaperducer 9y ago
      > Any other employer is allowed to, so why not Facebook? No. This is explicitly illegal in some states.
      - testvox 9y ago
        Edit: I just realized you were probably talking about it being explicitly illegal to discriminate based on political affiliation in some states which is true.
alphabettsy 9y ago
I’m glad someone is asking about the collection of non-user data and data collection outside Facebook sites, but I can’t help wanting someone qualified to speak on such technical subjects that would be able to effectively question without a prepared list.
- bcheung 9y ago
  It's an important concern but anyone who has Google Analytics, or any other analytics tool, installed on their website is collecting non-user data. This happens pretty much across the board. There's also the concern about derived data, like some kind of user embedding vector from clustering, that provides a lot of information about the user that is not available in the raw source data.
  - confounded 9y ago
    I think this is a bad analogy. If site-usage data is being collected via use of your site, then by definition it’s on users. That’s not the same thing as buying files on individuals who don’t use your site from data brokers.
  - bhhaskin 9y ago
    That is why GA doesn't allow PII (personally identifiable information). They can't track a GA session back to a real person.
  - alphabettsy 9y ago
    That really isn’t the same thing at all. Facebook collects data from people who never visit their site and offer no way to prevent this data collection. One of my biggest annoyances is so many companies and groups posting things only on Facebook, especially Facebook events.
- rhizome 9y ago
  Newt Gingrich killed the Office of Technology Assessment in 1995, which used to provide this knowledge to Congresspeople. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/10/the-much-needed-and-sane-congressional-office-that-gingrich-killed-off-and-we-need-back/264160/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/10/the-m...
jasode 9y ago
Some thoughts about the possiblities: 1) he's lying ... which would be dangerous since it only takes one disgruntled employee to expose emails and work projects that merged in 3rd-party data (e.g. Acxiom). 2) he's not "lying" ... by doing his version of Clinton's "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is".[0] Let's say Facebook has an internal system that collects data on non-Facebook identities into a holding area. Maybe they internally call it "deferred profiles" or "pre-activated profiles" but not exactly "shadow profiles". Well, MZ can basically interpret "do you have shadow profiles?" as a hyper-literal question and answer with a hyper-literal answer: "no". Again, a Facebook insider would have to come forward and reveal what the shadow-but-we-dont-call-it-that profile actually is. 3) he's telling the truth by every meaning of the question. Facebook truly has zero data on non-Facebook users. [0] https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=depends+on+what+the+meaning+of+is+is https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=depends+on+what...
- oflannabhra 9y ago
  3) is provably false by the product. Facebook can accurately suggest friends for you immediately after sign-up.
  - notimetorelax 9y ago
    I believe they do this based on emails and phone numbers.
    - Lionsion 9y ago
      Isn't the social graph they've built of nonusers from address books shared with them part of the "shadow profile"?
      - jartelt 9y ago
        Building a system where you input an e-mail address and it spits out likely friends of that e-mail address isn't exactly the same as having pre-built "shadow profiles" for a bunch of e-mail addresses. With such a system it would be trivial to build a social graph for a person quickly after they sign up for facebook (and then suggest friends). But, doing so doesn't necessarily mean facebook had previously built out a social graph for that e-mail address and had a profile waiting for it in the shadows.
Chardok 9y ago
Lujan: It’s been admitted by Facebook that you do collect data points on non-[Facebook users]. My question is, can someone who does not have a Facebook account opt out of Facebook’s involuntary data collection? Zuckerberg: Anyone can turn off and opt out of any data collection for ads, whether they use our services or not Is this not just an outright lie? You literally have to use their services to turn off/opt out anything.
- BartFutter 9y ago
  yes
- EquallyJust 9y ago
  This isn't a lie. You can opt out of interest based ads without having to be a Facebook user by visiting https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings which redirects you to http://www.aboutads.info/choices/ http://www.aboutads.info/choices/.
  - wil421 9y ago
    Found the Facebook shill account. Created one hour ago with copy paste responses.
    - pouta 9y ago
      Is this a bannable offense?
      - wil421 9y ago
        The parent poster actually went and deleted a bunch of post after my comment. Trying to keep a standard on HN.
      - dang 9y ago
        It certainly breaks the site guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
deagle50 9y ago
He slipped up yesterday and opened the door to the biggest issue of them all, coersion and brainwashing of users for profit, and the Senator who caught him in a lie didn't explore it further. No wonder they were testing if they can make you happy or sad by manipulating your feed when they sell the OUTCOME not just the impression. https://youtu.be/6ValJMOpt7s?t=2h36m49s https://youtu.be/6ValJMOpt7s?t=2h36m49s
- p5378b 9y ago
  Senator: If somebody advertises on facebook and somebody purchases something. Does facebook get a percentage or any kind of fee associated with any kind of successful purchase from the advertiser. Zuckerberg: The way that the system works is advertisers bid how much it's worth it to them to show an ad or when an action happens. So, it's not that we would get a percentage of the sale but... let's just use an example. Lets say you're an app developer and your goal is you want to get more people to install your app. You could bid in the ad system and say that I will pay $3 anytime someone installs this app and then we basically calculate, on our side, which ads are going to be relevant for people and we have an incentive to show people ads that are going to be relevant because we only get paid when it delivers a business result and that's how the system works.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Link is dead. Can you post what lie it was?
  - deagle50 9y ago
    He was maintaining that all Facebook does is sell innocent ads. Then was asked if Facebook gets a cut of 3rd party business or if they get paid based on outcomes. He said no, but his example revealed that in fact they do sell outcomes, which is what makes them so compelling to companies who bid. It's in Facebook's financial interest to gain as much power of its users as possible in order to achieve higher success rates for its customers. This something the vast majority of users don't understand. The Facebook experience is engineered to make you do things in a much more sophisticated way than any other advertising business to date. They can recursively manipulate your emotions to drive up their outcome compensation.
bcheung 9y ago
Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? I watched the entire hearing, it was pretty interesting. I was surprised how ignorant many of the senators were of the subject matter on hand. Some of them clearly didn't understand the difference between Facebook and the Internet. Or they thought that Facebook, Google, Twitter, were all the same thing, this mysterious "Internet" and somehow Zuckerberg was in charge of it all. Some of the questions were impossible to answer because they made no sense and they kept hammering him for not answering it. Then there were senators basically trying to guilt trip him into endorsing their bill when he already said he supports the principle behind it but it would depend on the details.
- confounded 9y ago
  > Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No, but you could argue that Google are.
- EquallyJust 9y ago
  Both Google Analytics and Facebook's interest based ads/"shadow" profiles work similarly. You can opt out of Google's interest based ads via https://adssettings.google.com https://adssettings.google.com and Facebook's interest based ads via https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings without having to have an account with either. I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service.
  - shock 9y ago
    > I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service. Based on what? Did you talk to someone in the know? Are you just speculating?
- johnchristopher 9y ago
  > Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No. They are asking for permissions (cookies law in the EU) because the GA code works that way. They bundle the consent in the legal text of the cookie notice. Users give consent, everything's fine. Then the site managers send this data over to Google with the GA code. Google applies it's labeling machine to the data, link it to a user with its super cookie tech and finally give an anonymised report to the site's manager. If the site manager is asked by a user to remove data the standard answer should be something like "we don't have it and so we can't delete it, call Google". Then when a user asks to Google for removal of its data things'll get interesting because Google will be removing a droplet from its ocean of data and a tenth digit will be rounded somewhere. That's how a site manager who uses only GA/pixel should manage the situation. Proving they didn't leak that private data and aren't using it.
TravelTechGuy 9y ago
Just one question, following Zuckeberg's congress show-and-dance: are the next CEOs to be called in front of the committee the ones from Equifax, Experian and TransUnion? Because the way I see it, they're collecting millions of "shadow profiles", with no consent, no remedy, no removal procedures. Furthermore, they sell that data to 3rd parties at will. I'd also look into a possible connection between one of these and Facebook. I imagine if someone crosses your social profile with actual credit records, real name, address, car, etc. then you have nothing private left to protect save the thoughts in your head.
- TAForObvReasons 9y ago
  This is not the time for whataboutism. The Equifax case is still being pursued. This happened a week ago: "Massachusetts can sue Equifax over data breach, judge rules" https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/04/05/massachusetts-can-sue-equifax-over-data-breach-judge-rules.html https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/04/05/massachusetts-can-sue-eq...
  - thieving_magpie 9y ago
    The term "whataboutism" is quickly becoming my least favorite word. We're allowed to talk about issues in a wider context. It's often helpful. I'm very much interested in this issue as a whole and not just singling out Facebook as if they're the only bad actors. I'd appreciate letting that discussion take place rather than using some newly minted word to try and stifle it.
    - jrs95 9y ago
      Agreed. It's not really being used correctly any time I see it being used (aside from describing actual propaganda, which is what this term comes from) -- "whataboutism" is a very specific tactic. The intent to distract from the issue at hand is a necessary component. Bringing in relative context in a productive manner != whataboutism.
    - Lionsion 9y ago
      Whataboutism isn't about "talk[ing] about issues in a wider context." It's about distracting from the issues at hand and derailing discussions.
glup 9y ago
Am I missing something or has the beacon functionality of the Like button not come up yet in the hearing? I think it's critical to note that the Like button can---and probably is---being used to build non-user profiles as well as user profiles. The critical technical thing is that the load of the Like button is the critical signal; whether the user actually liked something is secondary. It seems like Senator Gardner got close yesterday but had some technical misunderstandings about just how powerful the Like button is.
- humblebee 9y ago
  It came up yesterday. A question was asked wether or not Zuckerberg thought user understood that Facebook had the ability to track every website they visit when Facebook social media icons appear on those pages.
  - glup 9y ago
    That's what I was referring to regarding the exchange with Gardner: it was talking about users and implied that Facebook had to be open at the same time. >> Senator Gardner: if you're logged in to Facebook with a separate browser and you log in to another — log in to another article, open a new tab in the browser while you have the Facebook tab open, and that new tab has a Facebook button on it, you track the article that your reading. So it wasn't emphasizing that this tracking is ubiquitous and could be used to construct quire information-rich shadow profiles. I still don't think the senators are aware of this. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/10/transcript-of-mark-zuckerbergs-senate-hearing https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/10...
drawkbox 9y ago
Facebook OpenGraph v2 stopped the ability of api app developers from getting friend data without their consent. For the most part 'shadow profiles' are dead as of 2013-ish when OpenGraph v2 came out. Lots of scammy Facebook companies died because of this, if you remember many game companies also suffered a bit like Zynga and threatened to leave, they were given special access to still do it for a while and I assume others like CA possibly. With v2 they also shut off using global Facebook user ids and moved them to a per app basis so you can't correlate outside your app, you'd have to correlate with other identifiers like email or deeper data comparing. Facebook also turned friend access into invitation lists where the other user had to agree and join the app themselves before you could pull their data. Facebook knew about shadow profiles and they already addressed it.
- Lionsion 9y ago
  > For the most part 'shadow profiles' are dead as of 2013-ish when OpenGraph v2 came out. > Facebook knew about shadow profiles and they already addressed it. No, I think you're confused. IIRC "shadow profiles" are the profiles Facebook builds of non-users based on data those people didn't share, like their friend's contact lists. The shadow profile issue has nothing to do with Facebook's public API. It's all about what data they're collecting and what they chose to do with it, regardless if the results are accessible to 3rd parties or not. There are multiple separate problems with Facebook, Cambridge Analytica is just one (and the one Zuck probably wants to focus on because it makes him look the best and is not structurally threatening to FB's business model).
  - drawkbox 9y ago
    > IIRC "shadow profiles" are the profiles Facebook builds of non-users based on data those people didn't share, like their friend's contact lists. From a development standpoint I clearly defined the 'shadow profile' you just explained. Facebook provides OpenGraph APIs that app developers can access personal data that is granted by a user. Previously to OpenGraph v2 you could access all friend data and pull down the whole social graph for any friend level shared data through one initial person, those were shadow profiles. For each individual permission you only needed one friend to agree to it if the other friend shared at the privacy defaults of friend access to everything. That has been shut down at of OpenGraph v2, look back on that time where they added it, lots of scammy sites were mad they couldn't build shadow profiles anymore. I built games on Facebook at the time and this was obvious to many game companies that were just there to collect data on users to sell not about the game. Remember all the birthday apps and zombie infection games? All data syphons. Facebook shut it down back then, not really because of privacy but partly, mostly largely because they were scared other companies were getting access to the whole social graph like many did including Zynga, CA, others. Were 'shadow users' a problem, yes, but go try to pull friend data or personal messages today, those are unique permissions you have to be granted by each user that you access and for each action, you also have to undergo a Facebook app review and justify use of them like you do with background geolocation on Apple. Part of this attack on Facebook is to bring in the government filter and firewall [1] as an extension of FOSTA / SESTA and most of these issues are resolved at Facebook already. If you don't want a government censorship filter [1] that the ISPs and large companies like Facebook will run, then understand that this is opening that can of worms. [1] https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advancing-under-trump/ https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advanci... EDIT: for the people arguing details about 'shadow profiles' > So what is a Facebook shadow profile, and where does yours lurk? [2] > A Facebook shadow profile is a file that Facebook keeps on you containing data it pulls up from looking at the information that a user’s friends voluntarily provide. [2] > You’re not supposed to see it, or even know it exists. This collection of information can include phone numbers, e-mail addresses, and other pertinent data about a user that they don’t necessarily put on their public profile. Even if you never gave Facebook your second email address or your home phone number, they may still have it on file, since anyone who uses the “Find My Friends” feature allows Facebook to scan their contacts. So if your friend has your contact info on her phone and uses that feature, Facebook can match your name to that information and add it to your file. [2] [2] https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/what-exactly-is-a-facebook-shadow-profile/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/what-exactly-is-a...
thirduncle 9y ago
Zuckerberg: Congressman, I’m not, I’m not familiar with that. Zuckerberg: I do not know off the top of my head. Zuckerberg: Congressman, I do not know off the top of my head but I can have our team get back to you afterward. This guy must have a whole team of people coaching him on what he can overtly lie about, what he can obfuscate - and when he can't do either, how to change the subject.
- saagarjha 9y ago
  It's obvious why he's doing this: it gives him time to come up with a response, in a non public setting, with the help of his legal team. There's no reason for him to answer difficult questions while testifying.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
billfruit 9y ago
Zs response was more to the tune that 'shadow profile' is not a term that he or Facebook uses to describe the said concept, and not denying that it may collect some data pertaining to non members.
- rhizome 9y ago
  If so, that's a pretty legalistic interpretation of the question.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    No, the question was a follow-up after he explicitly acknowledged gathering non-user data; the question about that non-user data was “So these are called shadow profiles, is that what they’ve been referred to by some?” It was literally a question about whether that term was commonly applied to the data Zuckerberg had already acknowledged FB was gathering. Answering “I'm not familiar with that” because you aren't aware of the use of the isn't “pretty legalistic”, it's the only kind of answer that makes sense.
Springcleaning 9y ago
Can your face be tagged when you don't have a Facebook account? I would be very upset if this is true.
- 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
  Yes. Ive never used facebook in my life, yet thanks to someone sharing a picture of me 10 years ago, and tagging it, it knows my name and will auto tag me in others.
  - B1FF_PSUVM 9y ago
    And holding data about people who never consented to it should bite them hard.
    - Springcleaning 9y ago
      No way to remove your data is even worse. I cannot opt-out without making an account. I don't want to have a Facebook account.
thibautg 9y ago
When I google my own first and last name, the 4th result is a Facebook “public figure” page of me. I deleted my account years ago though. Creepy.
TomMckenny 9y ago
I sure wish Equifax were questioned about collecting information with equal outrage.
jandrese 9y ago
I find it incredible how many congressmen seem interested in Facebook implementing a rich person mode where you pay them money to not share your data. They aren't worried so much about Facebook gathering data, but that there isn't an exception for the 1%.
- moate 9y ago
  "Listen, we've been working our asses off to create Rich/Poor tracks for the Legal system and law enforcement practices, how do we get you in on that action? Who do I have to bribe at facebook?"
benevol 9y ago
What a liar, it's getting more ridiculous every day.
noja 9y ago
Can anyone find an interview or video where he (or his senior team) contradicts him?
dragonwriter 9y ago
The title is extreme clickbait; he acknowledged the existence of nonuser data collection (and discussed one use of it), but denied knowledge of the common use of the term “shadow profiles” to refer to the data thus collected.
matt_the_bass 9y ago
“So you’re directing people that don’t even have a Facebook page to sign up for a Facebook page to access their data” That sounds like a simple solution. Yeah right.

201 points by peterkelly 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

paulie_a 9y ago

TLDR: Zuckerberg continues to lie to Congress

dang 9y ago
This comment breaks the site guidelines. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all. You may not owe better to Zuckerberg but you do owe better to the community here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- paulie_a 9y ago
  I am sorry to summarize that a billionaire is an outright liar in a congressional hearing. There is no other way to put it. He might as well say "I am not a crook"

johnchristopher 9y ago

> Lujan: It may surprise you that we’ve not talked about this a lot today. You’ve said everyone controls their data, but you’re collecting data on people who are not even Facebook users who have never signed a consent, a privacy agreement. > And it may surprise you that on Facebook’s page when you go to “I don’t have a Facebook account and would like to request all my personal data stored by Facebook” it takes you to a form that says “go to your Facebook page and then on your account settings you can download your data.” This is typically something Facebook should be prepared for considering it's one of the use case of the GDPR. It's highly likely they are prepared for that but won't show it before the storm.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
TAForObvReasons 9y ago
WOW they are discussing the FB trackers now. This may actually get real
- fastball 9y ago
  Yeah, Congresswoman Dingell is laying it down. She even specifically mentioned the Facebook "pixel" in a technically accurate way!
  - scoggs 9y ago
    I'm not sure if she's technically savvy enough to have known that or researched it on her own but if not I'm really glad her interns or subordinates were focused on important talking points that will really help define the problems at hand.
    - Waterluvian 9y ago
      Agreed. Its absolutely not her role to be a specialist. Her role is policy and lawmaking. A good Congressperson would be one who can wield the full force of their team's knowledge and research power.
      - noir_lord 9y ago
        > A good Congressperson would be one who can wield the full force of their team's knowledge and research power. In practice I fear it's more that a 'good' (electable) congressperson is the one who can wield the full force of their lobbiest's knowledge and power. I try hard not to be cynical but as a citizen of the UK the soft control the private sector has over our government is horribly worrying.
  - artursapek 9y ago
    However, she focused on statistics, not intent behind those things - what type of data FB collects and why. She was almost there but sort of wasted the opportunity.

danschumann 9y ago

He also denied knowing the political orientation of his content police(during yesterday's Cruz question), however, he's Facebook, so he knows everyone's political biases.

fra 9y ago
Are you seriously suggesting Facebook use it's employee's private account data as part of hiring & performance management?
- testvox 9y ago
  Why would they not? Any other employer is allowed to, so why not Facebook?
  - fra 9y ago
    Facebook has a different level of access. Seems to me like that would be all kinds of unethical.
    - einr 9y ago
      And clearly, Facebook would not use personal information for unethical purposes.
  - heartbreak 9y ago
    Because the liability is not worth it.
  - reaperducer 9y ago
    > Any other employer is allowed to, so why not Facebook? No. This is explicitly illegal in some states.
    - testvox 9y ago
      Edit: I just realized you were probably talking about it being explicitly illegal to discriminate based on political affiliation in some states which is true.

alphabettsy 9y ago

I’m glad someone is asking about the collection of non-user data and data collection outside Facebook sites, but I can’t help wanting someone qualified to speak on such technical subjects that would be able to effectively question without a prepared list.

bcheung 9y ago
It's an important concern but anyone who has Google Analytics, or any other analytics tool, installed on their website is collecting non-user data. This happens pretty much across the board. There's also the concern about derived data, like some kind of user embedding vector from clustering, that provides a lot of information about the user that is not available in the raw source data.
- confounded 9y ago
  I think this is a bad analogy. If site-usage data is being collected via use of your site, then by definition it’s on users. That’s not the same thing as buying files on individuals who don’t use your site from data brokers.
- bhhaskin 9y ago
  That is why GA doesn't allow PII (personally identifiable information). They can't track a GA session back to a real person.
- alphabettsy 9y ago
  That really isn’t the same thing at all. Facebook collects data from people who never visit their site and offer no way to prevent this data collection. One of my biggest annoyances is so many companies and groups posting things only on Facebook, especially Facebook events.
rhizome 9y ago
Newt Gingrich killed the Office of Technology Assessment in 1995, which used to provide this knowledge to Congresspeople. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/10/the-much-needed-and-sane-congressional-office-that-gingrich-killed-off-and-we-need-back/264160/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/10/the-m...

jasode 9y ago

Some thoughts about the possiblities: 1) he's lying ... which would be dangerous since it only takes one disgruntled employee to expose emails and work projects that merged in 3rd-party data (e.g. Acxiom). 2) he's not "lying" ... by doing his version of Clinton's "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is".[0] Let's say Facebook has an internal system that collects data on non-Facebook identities into a holding area. Maybe they internally call it "deferred profiles" or "pre-activated profiles" but not exactly "shadow profiles". Well, MZ can basically interpret "do you have shadow profiles?" as a hyper-literal question and answer with a hyper-literal answer: "no". Again, a Facebook insider would have to come forward and reveal what the shadow-but-we-dont-call-it-that profile actually is. 3) he's telling the truth by every meaning of the question. Facebook truly has zero data on non-Facebook users. [0] https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=depends+on+what+the+meaning+of+is+is https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=depends+on+what...

oflannabhra 9y ago
3) is provably false by the product. Facebook can accurately suggest friends for you immediately after sign-up.
- notimetorelax 9y ago
  I believe they do this based on emails and phone numbers.
  - Lionsion 9y ago
    Isn't the social graph they've built of nonusers from address books shared with them part of the "shadow profile"?
    - jartelt 9y ago
      Building a system where you input an e-mail address and it spits out likely friends of that e-mail address isn't exactly the same as having pre-built "shadow profiles" for a bunch of e-mail addresses. With such a system it would be trivial to build a social graph for a person quickly after they sign up for facebook (and then suggest friends). But, doing so doesn't necessarily mean facebook had previously built out a social graph for that e-mail address and had a profile waiting for it in the shadows.

Chardok 9y ago

Lujan: It’s been admitted by Facebook that you do collect data points on non-[Facebook users]. My question is, can someone who does not have a Facebook account opt out of Facebook’s involuntary data collection? Zuckerberg: Anyone can turn off and opt out of any data collection for ads, whether they use our services or not Is this not just an outright lie? You literally have to use their services to turn off/opt out anything.

BartFutter 9y ago
yes
EquallyJust 9y ago
This isn't a lie. You can opt out of interest based ads without having to be a Facebook user by visiting https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings which redirects you to http://www.aboutads.info/choices/ http://www.aboutads.info/choices/.
- wil421 9y ago
  Found the Facebook shill account. Created one hour ago with copy paste responses.
  - pouta 9y ago
    Is this a bannable offense?
    - wil421 9y ago
      The parent poster actually went and deleted a bunch of post after my comment. Trying to keep a standard on HN.
    - dang 9y ago
      It certainly breaks the site guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

deagle50 9y ago

He slipped up yesterday and opened the door to the biggest issue of them all, coersion and brainwashing of users for profit, and the Senator who caught him in a lie didn't explore it further. No wonder they were testing if they can make you happy or sad by manipulating your feed when they sell the OUTCOME not just the impression. https://youtu.be/6ValJMOpt7s?t=2h36m49s https://youtu.be/6ValJMOpt7s?t=2h36m49s

p5378b 9y ago
Senator: If somebody advertises on facebook and somebody purchases something. Does facebook get a percentage or any kind of fee associated with any kind of successful purchase from the advertiser. Zuckerberg: The way that the system works is advertisers bid how much it's worth it to them to show an ad or when an action happens. So, it's not that we would get a percentage of the sale but... let's just use an example. Lets say you're an app developer and your goal is you want to get more people to install your app. You could bid in the ad system and say that I will pay $3 anytime someone installs this app and then we basically calculate, on our side, which ads are going to be relevant for people and we have an incentive to show people ads that are going to be relevant because we only get paid when it delivers a business result and that's how the system works.
dingo_bat 9y ago
Link is dead. Can you post what lie it was?
- deagle50 9y ago
  He was maintaining that all Facebook does is sell innocent ads. Then was asked if Facebook gets a cut of 3rd party business or if they get paid based on outcomes. He said no, but his example revealed that in fact they do sell outcomes, which is what makes them so compelling to companies who bid. It's in Facebook's financial interest to gain as much power of its users as possible in order to achieve higher success rates for its customers. This something the vast majority of users don't understand. The Facebook experience is engineered to make you do things in a much more sophisticated way than any other advertising business to date. They can recursively manipulate your emotions to drive up their outcome compensation.

bcheung 9y ago

Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? I watched the entire hearing, it was pretty interesting. I was surprised how ignorant many of the senators were of the subject matter on hand. Some of them clearly didn't understand the difference between Facebook and the Internet. Or they thought that Facebook, Google, Twitter, were all the same thing, this mysterious "Internet" and somehow Zuckerberg was in charge of it all. Some of the questions were impossible to answer because they made no sense and they kept hammering him for not answering it. Then there were senators basically trying to guilt trip him into endorsing their bill when he already said he supports the principle behind it but it would depend on the details.

confounded 9y ago
> Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No, but you could argue that Google are.
EquallyJust 9y ago
Both Google Analytics and Facebook's interest based ads/"shadow" profiles work similarly. You can opt out of Google's interest based ads via https://adssettings.google.com https://adssettings.google.com and Facebook's interest based ads via https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings without having to have an account with either. I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service.
- shock 9y ago
  > I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service. Based on what? Did you talk to someone in the know? Are you just speculating?
johnchristopher 9y ago
> Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No. They are asking for permissions (cookies law in the EU) because the GA code works that way. They bundle the consent in the legal text of the cookie notice. Users give consent, everything's fine. Then the site managers send this data over to Google with the GA code. Google applies it's labeling machine to the data, link it to a user with its super cookie tech and finally give an anonymised report to the site's manager. If the site manager is asked by a user to remove data the standard answer should be something like "we don't have it and so we can't delete it, call Google". Then when a user asks to Google for removal of its data things'll get interesting because Google will be removing a droplet from its ocean of data and a tenth digit will be rounded somewhere. That's how a site manager who uses only GA/pixel should manage the situation. Proving they didn't leak that private data and aren't using it.

TravelTechGuy 9y ago

Just one question, following Zuckeberg's congress show-and-dance: are the next CEOs to be called in front of the committee the ones from Equifax, Experian and TransUnion? Because the way I see it, they're collecting millions of "shadow profiles", with no consent, no remedy, no removal procedures. Furthermore, they sell that data to 3rd parties at will. I'd also look into a possible connection between one of these and Facebook. I imagine if someone crosses your social profile with actual credit records, real name, address, car, etc. then you have nothing private left to protect save the thoughts in your head.

TAForObvReasons 9y ago
This is not the time for whataboutism. The Equifax case is still being pursued. This happened a week ago: "Massachusetts can sue Equifax over data breach, judge rules" https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/04/05/massachusetts-can-sue-equifax-over-data-breach-judge-rules.html https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/04/05/massachusetts-can-sue-eq...
- thieving_magpie 9y ago
  The term "whataboutism" is quickly becoming my least favorite word. We're allowed to talk about issues in a wider context. It's often helpful. I'm very much interested in this issue as a whole and not just singling out Facebook as if they're the only bad actors. I'd appreciate letting that discussion take place rather than using some newly minted word to try and stifle it.
  - jrs95 9y ago
    Agreed. It's not really being used correctly any time I see it being used (aside from describing actual propaganda, which is what this term comes from) -- "whataboutism" is a very specific tactic. The intent to distract from the issue at hand is a necessary component. Bringing in relative context in a productive manner != whataboutism.
  - Lionsion 9y ago
    Whataboutism isn't about "talk[ing] about issues in a wider context." It's about distracting from the issues at hand and derailing discussions.

glup 9y ago

Am I missing something or has the beacon functionality of the Like button not come up yet in the hearing? I think it's critical to note that the Like button can---and probably is---being used to build non-user profiles as well as user profiles. The critical technical thing is that the load of the Like button is the critical signal; whether the user actually liked something is secondary. It seems like Senator Gardner got close yesterday but had some technical misunderstandings about just how powerful the Like button is.

humblebee 9y ago
It came up yesterday. A question was asked wether or not Zuckerberg thought user understood that Facebook had the ability to track every website they visit when Facebook social media icons appear on those pages.
- glup 9y ago
  That's what I was referring to regarding the exchange with Gardner: it was talking about users and implied that Facebook had to be open at the same time. >> Senator Gardner: if you're logged in to Facebook with a separate browser and you log in to another — log in to another article, open a new tab in the browser while you have the Facebook tab open, and that new tab has a Facebook button on it, you track the article that your reading. So it wasn't emphasizing that this tracking is ubiquitous and could be used to construct quire information-rich shadow profiles. I still don't think the senators are aware of this. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/10/transcript-of-mark-zuckerbergs-senate-hearing https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/10...

drawkbox 9y ago

Facebook OpenGraph v2 stopped the ability of api app developers from getting friend data without their consent. For the most part 'shadow profiles' are dead as of 2013-ish when OpenGraph v2 came out. Lots of scammy Facebook companies died because of this, if you remember many game companies also suffered a bit like Zynga and threatened to leave, they were given special access to still do it for a while and I assume others like CA possibly. With v2 they also shut off using global Facebook user ids and moved them to a per app basis so you can't correlate outside your app, you'd have to correlate with other identifiers like email or deeper data comparing. Facebook also turned friend access into invitation lists where the other user had to agree and join the app themselves before you could pull their data. Facebook knew about shadow profiles and they already addressed it.

Lionsion 9y ago
> For the most part 'shadow profiles' are dead as of 2013-ish when OpenGraph v2 came out. > Facebook knew about shadow profiles and they already addressed it. No, I think you're confused. IIRC "shadow profiles" are the profiles Facebook builds of non-users based on data those people didn't share, like their friend's contact lists. The shadow profile issue has nothing to do with Facebook's public API. It's all about what data they're collecting and what they chose to do with it, regardless if the results are accessible to 3rd parties or not. There are multiple separate problems with Facebook, Cambridge Analytica is just one (and the one Zuck probably wants to focus on because it makes him look the best and is not structurally threatening to FB's business model).
- drawkbox 9y ago
  > IIRC "shadow profiles" are the profiles Facebook builds of non-users based on data those people didn't share, like their friend's contact lists. From a development standpoint I clearly defined the 'shadow profile' you just explained. Facebook provides OpenGraph APIs that app developers can access personal data that is granted by a user. Previously to OpenGraph v2 you could access all friend data and pull down the whole social graph for any friend level shared data through one initial person, those were shadow profiles. For each individual permission you only needed one friend to agree to it if the other friend shared at the privacy defaults of friend access to everything. That has been shut down at of OpenGraph v2, look back on that time where they added it, lots of scammy sites were mad they couldn't build shadow profiles anymore. I built games on Facebook at the time and this was obvious to many game companies that were just there to collect data on users to sell not about the game. Remember all the birthday apps and zombie infection games? All data syphons. Facebook shut it down back then, not really because of privacy but partly, mostly largely because they were scared other companies were getting access to the whole social graph like many did including Zynga, CA, others. Were 'shadow users' a problem, yes, but go try to pull friend data or personal messages today, those are unique permissions you have to be granted by each user that you access and for each action, you also have to undergo a Facebook app review and justify use of them like you do with background geolocation on Apple. Part of this attack on Facebook is to bring in the government filter and firewall [1] as an extension of FOSTA / SESTA and most of these issues are resolved at Facebook already. If you don't want a government censorship filter [1] that the ISPs and large companies like Facebook will run, then understand that this is opening that can of worms. [1] https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advancing-under-trump/ https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advanci... EDIT: for the people arguing details about 'shadow profiles' > So what is a Facebook shadow profile, and where does yours lurk? [2] > A Facebook shadow profile is a file that Facebook keeps on you containing data it pulls up from looking at the information that a user’s friends voluntarily provide. [2] > You’re not supposed to see it, or even know it exists. This collection of information can include phone numbers, e-mail addresses, and other pertinent data about a user that they don’t necessarily put on their public profile. Even if you never gave Facebook your second email address or your home phone number, they may still have it on file, since anyone who uses the “Find My Friends” feature allows Facebook to scan their contacts. So if your friend has your contact info on her phone and uses that feature, Facebook can match your name to that information and add it to your file. [2] [2] https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/what-exactly-is-a-facebook-shadow-profile/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/what-exactly-is-a...

thirduncle 9y ago

Zuckerberg: Congressman, I’m not, I’m not familiar with that. Zuckerberg: I do not know off the top of my head. Zuckerberg: Congressman, I do not know off the top of my head but I can have our team get back to you afterward. This guy must have a whole team of people coaching him on what he can overtly lie about, what he can obfuscate - and when he can't do either, how to change the subject.

saagarjha 9y ago
It's obvious why he's doing this: it gives him time to come up with a response, in a non public setting, with the help of his legal team. There's no reason for him to answer difficult questions while testifying.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

billfruit 9y ago

Zs response was more to the tune that 'shadow profile' is not a term that he or Facebook uses to describe the said concept, and not denying that it may collect some data pertaining to non members.

rhizome 9y ago
If so, that's a pretty legalistic interpretation of the question.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  No, the question was a follow-up after he explicitly acknowledged gathering non-user data; the question about that non-user data was “So these are called shadow profiles, is that what they’ve been referred to by some?” It was literally a question about whether that term was commonly applied to the data Zuckerberg had already acknowledged FB was gathering. Answering “I'm not familiar with that” because you aren't aware of the use of the isn't “pretty legalistic”, it's the only kind of answer that makes sense.

Springcleaning 9y ago

Can your face be tagged when you don't have a Facebook account? I would be very upset if this is true.

45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
Yes. Ive never used facebook in my life, yet thanks to someone sharing a picture of me 10 years ago, and tagging it, it knows my name and will auto tag me in others.
- B1FF_PSUVM 9y ago
  And holding data about people who never consented to it should bite them hard.
  - Springcleaning 9y ago
    No way to remove your data is even worse. I cannot opt-out without making an account. I don't want to have a Facebook account.

thibautg 9y ago

When I google my own first and last name, the 4th result is a Facebook “public figure” page of me. I deleted my account years ago though. Creepy.

TomMckenny 9y ago

I sure wish Equifax were questioned about collecting information with equal outrage.

jandrese 9y ago

I find it incredible how many congressmen seem interested in Facebook implementing a rich person mode where you pay them money to not share your data. They aren't worried so much about Facebook gathering data, but that there isn't an exception for the 1%.

moate 9y ago
"Listen, we've been working our asses off to create Rich/Poor tracks for the Legal system and law enforcement practices, how do we get you in on that action? Who do I have to bribe at facebook?"

benevol 9y ago

What a liar, it's getting more ridiculous every day.

noja 9y ago

Can anyone find an interview or video where he (or his senior team) contradicts him?

dragonwriter 9y ago

The title is extreme clickbait; he acknowledged the existence of nonuser data collection (and discussed one use of it), but denied knowledge of the common use of the term “shadow profiles” to refer to the data thus collected.

matt_the_bass 9y ago

“So you’re directing people that don’t even have a Facebook page to sign up for a Facebook page to access their data” That sounds like a simple solution. Yeah right.