20 ms·

What Data Does Facebook Collect When I’m Not Using Facebook, and Why?

461 points by rock_hard 9y ago

shafyy 9y ago
FB does an amazing job in crisis management.
- cag_ii 9y ago
  How so?
  - adventured 9y ago
    I hadn't considered it until that parent post. Compared to what I've seen out of Wall Street banks during the great recession, Equifax, shady lenders, mortgage scumbags, politicians, big tobacco, big oil, big sugar, GE & PCBs, CIA/Bush & torture, various Iraq war scandals, NSA spying scandal, Yahoo, Target, and about 407 other data, consumer, privacy breaches or abuses I've seen the last 20-30 years - Facebook gets high marks in this round for being very public about responding and tackling it head-on, but only after prior delay & evade maneuvers in the past. Most likely they recognized they were staring down a serious Congressional legislative/regulatory problem that could severely damage their business, and had no choice.
    - shafyy 9y ago
      Yes, that's what I mean. Thanks :-)
      - rawland 9y ago
        FB does an amazing job in crisis management at gunpoint?!
  - moate 9y ago
    Going to assume OP was being sarcastic here
  - shafyy 9y ago
    I'm not being sarcastic. - They are highly reactive, pushing a lot of new changes publicly (I know that the changes don't actually change anything, but from a PR perspective they do) - They are super apologetic and stand for their mistakes Now, it's, of course, impossible to say today if they are going to get better re privacy, but they definitely make the public impressions that they will. And that's a good response to the crises they're having. PS: This is a neutral observation of their actions
  - bertil 9y ago
    Mark said he didn't have details about how data is collected outside of Facebook (and it is very likely that he expected to say something false or irrelevant -- and he did: data collection for security purposes is not personal) but that he will come back to it, and he delivers, under a week.
djrogers 9y ago
If one takes out all of the defensive posturing (entire paragraph explaining that Twitter, LinkedIn, Amazon, and Google all do the same thing), and the intentionally simplified (cookies, which are identifiers that websites use to know if you’ve visited before), we are left with this: Facebook tracks virtually every website you visit, as well as usage data from many apps, even if you aren't logged in to facebook or don't have an account. We use this data, and tie it to your identity whenever possible, so we can charge advertisers more money.
- jdp23 9y ago
  Good summary!
- alexandercrohde 9y ago
  And even if they claimed exactly otherwise, I wouldn't trust them. I'm not sure there's anything that can be done at this point to undo that distrust.
  - rock_hard 9y ago
    You should ask yourself the question whether it was Facebook or the media that made you distrust Facebook. Because I can’t recall a single instance of when Facebook or Zuck lied to the public... but I recall plenty of lies the media has spread about Facebook
    - alexandercrohde 9y ago
      Someone doesn't have to lie to lose your trust.
- IshKebab 9y ago
  Yeah when you put it like that it sounds bad, but Facebook really are right that literally every other advertiser on the planet does exactly the same thing. Honestly I think the bigger issue is that Facebook tracks you on third party sites when you are logged in to Facebook - in those cases they easily know your exact identity. Most advertisers can't do that. Google could, but I'm not sure if they do or not.
awakeasleep 9y ago
Nothing mentioned about the fact that with all your friend's address books, they have a node for you on the social network graph, even if it's implied.
- Angostura 9y ago
  Since FB owns WhatsApp, I'm sure it's pretty explicit, not implied.
thijser 9y ago
"When you visit a site or app that uses our services, we receive information even if you’re logged out or don’t have a Facebook account." Then at the end under "What controls do I have": "you can opt out of these types of ads entirely — so you never see ads on Facebook based on information we have received from other websites and apps." Except that that's only possible when you're logged in. The link they provide doesn't work for logged out users. It seems they don't provide any control tools for logged out users/non Facebook users.
- mgummelt 9y ago
  The type of ads you see on FB is only relevant to FB users.
  - gervase 9y ago
    Then I seem not to understand the benefit they see from tracking non-users' information - how can this be of benefit to advertisers if these users are never targeted? In particular, what benefits would be generated by linking this tracking information with the real identify of a non-FB user (that couldn't also be leveraged in a semi-anonymous way)? In other words, I see the benefit to FB of being able to say "Person A likes 1, 2, 3; User B likes 1 and 2 - perhaps they also like 3?" where A is a non-user and B is a FB user, but I don't see the benefit derived from identifying Person A to advertisers if they can only target that person on FB, where they aren't a user?
    - mgummelt 9y ago
      They don't allow advertisers to target non-users. I'm sure they use non-user data for clustering, just as you described. They also probably use it when the user finally does create a FB account.
  - thijser 9y ago
    Facebook also has the audience network, which serves ads on other websites and apps.
- 9y ago
cag_ii 9y ago
It's interesting that the "Privacy Controls" seem to only change how you see the data they've collected about you, but doesn't seem to change how or when they collect data about you. That doesn't sound like privacy control at all!
mgummelt 9y ago
> We require websites and apps who use our tools to tell you they’re collecting and sharing your information with us, and to get your permission to do so. Am I missing something or does this line conflict with the rest of the post?
- cag_ii 9y ago
  I think the technical term for this is "Passing the buck"...
mikestew 9y ago
All I know is that the Pi-Hole at our house says Facebook domains are blocked way more than anything Google has running (w/o the numbers in front of me, I wouldn't be surprised if it's an order of magnitude difference). And neither one of us has a FB account, that's just from the craplets littering your average web page. Kudos to FB for posting this in understandable languague. OTOH, it does have the scent of trying to get ahead of $SOMETHING.
Someone 9y ago
“We give you a number of controls over the way this data is used” “You can remove any of these advertisers to stop seeing their ads.” “Finally, if you don’t want us to use your Facebook interests to show you ads on other websites and apps, there’s a control for that too” Reading that critically, there doesn’t seem to be any way for Facebook users to control what data Facebook collects. I wonder whether that page will change due to the GDPR.
- kristianc 9y ago
  Facebook would legitimately be able to argue that the ad targeting is part of their core product, the ads are critical to the function of the website, and that you agree to have your data processed by signing up.
  - rickycook 9y ago
    remove ads from facebook and you still have the functionality of facebook that their “data subjects” care about so that’s likely a no. you could probably not argue that successfully *edit: with that being said, i’m almost certain that there will be some way people find to offer ads and targeting with the GDPR
  - Angostura 9y ago
    From my understanding of the GDPR, no I really don't think that they would be able to argue that, actually. Particularly when I'm not logged into their site.
    - zjs 9y ago
      IANAL, but I think it depends on what data they collect. Part of running any advertising business is accurately billing the advertisers. To do that, they need to measure enough information to track viewed impressions, click-through rate, etc. If they collect only enough information to perform business functions like these, I believe that would constitute a legal basis for processing under the GDPR. They may have a harder time using that justification for information that is only needed for ad targeting. In that case, consent may be an easier legal basis for them to establish, for which an account would be useful.
bamboozled 9y ago
This is getting so ridiculous, I really dislike how Facebook is using the issues of late as a way to "reeducate" people on how it's ok to be doing what it's doing. It's not ok, and not acceptable. It's a shame we've allowed a web to be built which allows for this kind of exploitation. I'm also acutely aware that it's not just Facebook.
- TheCapn 9y ago
  I'm not entirely convinced that if we had a chance to do it over that we wouldn't just repeat the same mistakes. Are there other massively profitable businesses that are free to users without some form of exploitation? Advertising and the industry that surrounds it is absolutely tainted as they chase analytics to make each set of eyeballs most profitable to themselves. How do we get "free" services while also having great privacy control in a way that the company can operate at a scale like Google or Facebook?
  - kerkeslager 9y ago
    > How do we get "free" services while also having great privacy control in a way that the company can operate at a scale like Google or Facebook? Can you justify why we as a society should want companies to operate at a scale like Google or Facebook?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
      > Can you justify why we as a society should want companies to operate at a scale like Google or Facebook? The simple (and inevitable) solution is to break up Facebook. No need to even get that complicated, at least to start: Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp.
      - kartan 9y ago
        > The simple (and inevitable) solution is to break up Facebook. There was a time when anti monopoly laws were taken seriously. That you are the number one social network should not be used to also become a big player on advertising, selling items, casual games, etc. Letting companies leverage on a monopoly to gain other markets is dangerous for the economy.
iaskwhy 9y ago
Very useful link in the article showing some of the things Facebook knows about you: https://facebook.com/ads/preferences https://facebook.com/ads/preferences
- hylianwarrior 9y ago
  Only works if you have an account.
aestetix 9y ago
Two questions Facebook needs to answer: 1. If I don't have a Facebook account, how can I delete the data Facebook has collected on me without creating an account? 2. If Facebook doesn't sell data, what is the purpose of shadow profiles?
- submeta 9y ago
  +1
- sebleon 9y ago
  1. You can’t. They didn’t have an incentive to prioritize this on product roadmap, at least not until now. 2. Most likely to jump start new accounts. They’ll be able to target ads at your new account better if they already have years of data about your interests.
  - kartan 9y ago
    > at least not until now. They have it to finish before the GDPR enforcement date (25 May 2018) - at which time those organizations in non-compliance may face heavy fines. So, all companies big and small need to have a good data governance that allows to delete data on demand. And, better than that, stop collecting any data that they don’t have been authorized to get. https://www.eugdpr.org https://www.eugdpr.org
- flatline 9y ago
  When asked question 2 before the US Congress, he repeatedly said that it's for security reasons, something about identifying attackers. It sounded to me like a corporate version of crying "national defense!" They really need to give a full accounting of what those are used for.
- clarkenheim 9y ago
  If Facebook need to answer this question then so do Google, Twitter, Amazon and basically anyone else with a big enough footprint.
- drb91 9y ago
denzil_correa 9y ago
All of this misses the key questions : Where does Facebook use the data explicitly and for what explicit purpose? Will Facebook notify every time data is used and in what capacity? Why or why not?
jumelles 9y ago
The only possible way a page like this could be a good idea if it just said "We collect no data" - otherwise it's a bad answer that just doesn't play well.
marze 9y ago
They may not know everything about everyone, but they are working on it. $500B market cap: the market thinks they will succeed.
majordroid 9y ago
> The browser shares your IP address so the website knows where on the internet to send the site content. Huh?!?
- freeone3000 9y ago
  This is "internet is a series of pipes" logic, but it's technically true - it's used for TCP routing. Why is it bubbled up the layers? Why does facebook store it? Well, it's not as if you can do anything with it. It's not even a great identifier, due to mobile networks, carrier-grade NAT, dynamic IPs... But it certainly shouldn't be treated as private, any more than your home address.
muglug 9y ago
> Ad Measurement. An advertiser can choose to add the Facebook Pixel, some computer code, to their site. This allows us to give advertisers stats about how many people are responding to their ads — even if they saw the ad on a different device — without us sharing anyone’s personal information. So I can look at an ad in Mobile Safari, and go to the advertiser's website in Chrome on my mac, and Facebook counts that as a referral, because I'm logged into FB on both browsers. Makes sense, but sort of creepy.
lolc 9y ago
> We don’t sell people’s data. Period. You just share it for a fee?
- tested24 9y ago
  Do you not understand how platform apis work? If you sign up for a third party app using Facebook and give them permission to access all your data you should expect them to capture all of your data
  - lolc 9y ago
    Are you sure everybody who clicked "ok" was aware of the distinction? Pointing the finger at their contractors is an easy way for Facebook to shift blame. They knew what was going on. And they eagerly participated on their side of the deal.
    - tested24 9y ago
      Shift blame? Facebook created an API that would allow people to create genuinely useful apps provided that users allowed them to access their data. I can think of a thousand interesting use cases for the data Facebook provided through their api. One bad actor screwed everyone. I'm surprised at how few people on hackernews have ever built or worked with apis. Facebook essentially built an open platform and now they are being punished for it because people are too stupid to understand what they are signing up for.
      - lolc 9y ago
        I may deplore that people are falling for a fraud, but I will still hold the fraudster in contempt. Not the people. So please don't call people stupid. They're up against something they are not prepared to understand. The Facebook API needs special quarantine whenever I work with it. To protect my users.
        tested24 9y ago
AdmiralAsshat 9y ago
> What controls do I have? > As Mark said last week, we believe everyone deserves good privacy controls. We require websites and apps who use our tools to tell you they’re collecting and sharing your information with us, and to get your permission to do so. Bullshit. I downloaded Facebook's data on me and found about 40 websites they said they had shared my profile with. I didn't authorize that. FB doesn't give me the ability to "revoke" permission to have my info shared with them, either. Nor does it allow me to request that the information on me given to those third parties be deleted.
- bertil 9y ago
  Actually, you absolutely can on https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/ https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/ - Advertisers you've interacted with - - Who have added their contact list to Facebook Hover over those you don’t know about; the X let you “Remove” those, i.e. ask Facebook to exclude you from those advertisers’ targeting. If you are in Europe, you should be able, starting next month, to leverage that list to ask those advertisers how they got your data, and expose data brokers. Facebook is simply (finally) offering you the ability to track data brokers.
  - trendia 9y ago
    Once the data has been given to a third party, we can no longer be guaranteed that the third party will delete it. That was one of the main problems with Cambridge Analytica -- they claimed to have deleted data but may not have actually done so.
- idunno246 9y ago
  Any company can upload a list of email addresses to facebook and say they have a relationship with you and then facebook will allow that company to market you. Its obviously against ToS to go out and purchase a list of emails and upload it to facebook and show those people ads. But uh, facebook can't prevent that without killing the feature. So in this case its not facebook sharing data, but companies lying to facebook and facebook going along with it to get paid.
- 9y ago
fenwick67 9y ago
> Social plugins, such as our Like and Share buttons, which make other sites more social and help you share content on Facebook; It's very disengenuous of them to mention that they collect data on you whether you click the button or not.
- mverwijs 9y ago
  Not to mention having the gal to call it 'being social'. War is peace. Invading privacy is social.
troupe 9y ago
> In addition, you can opt out of these types of ads entirely — so you never see ads on Facebook based on information we have received from other websites and apps. They have this listed as a privacy control, but it doesn't provide any way to tell them to not compile a list of the other sites you visit outside of Facebook.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
mhneu 9y ago
The most important question is about "informed consent". Yes, users consented to giving data to facebook. But they did so via a convoluted click-through legal agreement, which almost no one reads, and which denies Facebook access if you decline. Then they can use your data for what are human subject experiments. If any other human subject experiment was proposed to a review board with that kind of consent form, it would be laughed out of the room, at best. No way would that be allowed. "Informed consent" is what Facebook -- and other data companies -- should be seeking. We already have this concept for data and user protection in research. We should just extend it to the private sector.
makecheck 9y ago
Whatever we consider “data” right now quite simply needs to be thrown out, replaced by things that are MUCH more temporary (e.g. where even the largest “collection” of data becomes useless within a week). And, access needs to be explicitly revocable at any time by either party. There should actually be a difference between, say, me giving you “phone number” and me giving anyone else “phone number” (directly or indirectly). Heck, even for my street address I’d feel better if I only gave out keys that everyone had to cash in at the post office and let the post office convert it to my real house number. There is no technical excuse at this point to have so many different bits of sensitive information floating around. And many of these pieces of information are permanently associated with you, meaning that any slip-up anywhere at any time can create a problem later on.
Rafuino 9y ago
Just spent 20 valuable minutes blocking ads from all the random companies, political campaigns, and celebrities who've somehow gotten hold of my contact information and added me to their list. Americans for Prosperity had me on their list for ~30 states, and that's just one of scores of organizations that I've absolutely never dealt with or wanted to provide my information. What I want to know is WHO sold/shared my information to these organizations in the first place. I'd also love for FB to give me to option to hide all their ads without clicking on every.single.one (again, there were hundreds of them...)!
QuadrupleA 9y ago
Shameless plug, I have a little open-source social sharing icons project that doesn't allow FB or any other services to track your website's users unless they choose to share something: https://github.com/QuadrupleA/private-secure-sharing-buttons https://github.com/QuadrupleA/private-secure-sharing-buttons
mirimir 9y ago
> What controls do I have? David neglected to mention that one can easily mark facebook.com as untrusted in NoScript. Ditto for linkedin.com, google-analytics.com, etc.
- cJ0th 9y ago
  > David neglected to mention that one can easily mark facebook.com as untrusted in NoScript. but don't they use hundreds of other domains for tracking that you may not even know?
  - mirimir 9y ago
    In NoScript, I allow only domains needed to minimally render the page.
PapaPug 9y ago
Curious -- how many here, knowing what they know now, have gone through the trouble of deleting their FB accounts?
- devilmoon 9y ago
  I did and honestly never felt better - now I'm just waiting to find out if through GDPR i'll be able to force them to remove every last bit of data they have about me.
  - PapaPug 9y ago
    I did as well.
wollstonecraft 9y ago
Is there any way to keep the faceberg android apps from starting on their own after you've force-stopped them?
- suyash 9y ago
  Nope this is a system level feature in Android where services can constantly run on the background.
- junnan 9y ago
  Uninstall and use chrome version.
  - milcron 9y ago
    On some phones, Facebook comes preinstalled as a system-level app that cannot be uninstalled. Idk what to recommend other than getting a phone that doesn't do that to you.
    - jpl56 9y ago
      On my phone, I never logged in to Facebook through the app and deactivated it and use the website, I hope it's sufficient.
- aembleton 9y ago
  Settings > Battery > Background activity manager Find it in the list and switch it off. I'm running Android 8.1.0 so YMMV
suyash 9y ago
Anyone noticed there comment got deleted from that blog post. I posted my comment using Facebook login but it's not there anymore.
troncjb 9y ago
One thing missing from this entire conversation: I personally signed up for Facebook at the age of 14. In fact, my friend made it for me and I took it over after he successfully harangued me into using it. I never, as an adult, consented to this statutory data rape.
- devilmoon 9y ago
  This is something really important to consider: Should Facebook be allowed only for 18+ people? If I remember correctly they allow 13yo and up to sign up and I don't think they have the legal abiliy to consent to this level of data sharing
askvictor 9y ago
At what point does should web-browsers start to interfere with this data collection? I'm aware of extensions that do this, but the average user isn't going to install one (or remember to reinstall it after they've got a new computer). The Do-Not-Track header seems to be dead in the water - should browsers make a more aggressive move against this? It's obviously a conflict of interest for Google (since they both have a competing product to FB, and like to do a heap of similar data collection themselves) as well as a possible Anti-trust concern; but Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft could be stepping in here.
- TheForumTroll 9y ago
  Firefox has containers and a special one just for Facebook. Apple will only do so if the have a way to get money out of it.
  - ec109685 9y ago
    If you never go to Facebook, Safari will prevent Facebook from building a profile across the sites you visit. For each parent site, Facebook will receive different cookies, which defeats their system.
phtrackingthrow 9y ago
Throwaway for reasons. My wife and I enjoy porn in our relationship. On my birthday last year, we were settling in for some, romance, and we open up pornhub only to find ads trying to entice me into a discount subscription for my birthday. They knew it was my birthday! Which, really freaked me out because: 1) I don't have or never have had an account with them. I've never given them my age and birthday. In fact, I never give out my birthday on the internet. I don't even have a Facebook, twitter, or any other social media account. 2) It was on my wife's tablet. I never ever use her tablet, especially for browsing porn. Anyone have an idea the machinery involved in making this determination?
- artificial 9y ago
  Just a hunch, if you were accessing from home, most likely your IP address.
- movedx 9y ago
  If you have two devices in a house and one never accesses Google and the other does, Google will know it's you using the non-Google device each and every time. There's more to mining you then cookies and tracking pixels. They use IPs, hardware and software profiling, behavioural patterns, and even the way you type on your keyboard (this is very, very accurate.) In short: you need a "clean room" (Tails) every time you go online and you need to change where you're coming online from (VPN). You can also use tools to change your keyboard/typing "profile" so as to cripple that means of tracking. Oh and you can't login to virtually any online account at all, ever, because these cookies can be used too.
  - rcraft 9y ago
    So if you use a VPN and incognito mode without logging into any online account, Google, Facebook, et al can still track you accurately? Curious any other tools besides vpn and private mode you would recommend? Any more links to read about these behaviorial, software and and type style tracking methods?
    - 9y ago
sakopov 9y ago
They track everything because others do it too. They also seem to imply that it's a totally normal thing for anyone to be doing this. The tone of this piece is really astounding.
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
When I'm at Target I kinda expect them to keep an eye on things I buy and let me know of things I might want to buy. What I don't like is when they follow me over to Panera and look over my shoulder at what I'm ordering there. I think that crosses a line.
- rootlocus 9y ago
  What if Panera installed special cameras provided by Target?
marcell 9y ago
Contrary to most comments here, it is significant that other companies do. Facebook competes in the free market. If they scale back on data collection, that will hurt their offering to advertisers and cost them money that will go to Google and others. That lost revenue will harm their ability to retain talent and build new products, and ultimately cost them their user base. “We don’t track you” is not as compelling a feature as “free video chat across the globe.” Facebook doesn’t operate in a vacuum. They can’t scale back data collection unless others do. Moreover, the United States doesn’t exist in a vacuum either. Scaling back all US companies will give a leg up to competitors in more lenient jurisdictions.
- 2trill2spill 9y ago
  Also I don't think most people would be willing to pay for Facebook which would be the alternative to surveillance and advertising.
- raz32dust 9y ago
  This is an important point and I wonder about it often. Especially the last one about countries that are lax on individual privacy. Imagine what China or Chinese companies could do with the genetic information they collect from their population. The lack of regulation is scary, but at the same time, they will be at the forefront of genetic engineering and designer humans. Can't think of any solution other than a World government. EU and AU has shown it is possible.
  - jamiek88 9y ago
    Is a world government necessarily a bad thing? A union of federated states globally could be a significant force for good. Impossible for the forseeable future of course but why immediately dismissed as a scary outcome?
    - raz32dust 9y ago
      I meant it as a good thing. Some things will need to be regulated at the global level. We are already seeing global problems - global warming being the prime example. I think we will end up either destroying ourselves or end up with a world government. World government will clearly be the better outcome. How that government works would also be an interesting topic for science fiction. Hint: I don't think it will be a democracy.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
intrasight 9y ago
Even if I keeled over dead tomorrow, FB would be collecting about me via all my still-living family and friends.
harry8 9y ago
"other people mug passers by too!" Can we just avoid this defence. The first one you catch, you prosecute fully and punish appropriately according to justice. Almost nobody knowingly signed up to be tracked everywhere they visit on the internet. Hiding it in fine print is every bit a con. You have ensure your conterparty understands the full extent of the contract or you have fraudulently obtained consent. Facebook now. They should be fully prosecuted. Then we catch the next crook, and the one after until the lawlessness is dealt with.
natch 9y ago
“We don’t sell people’s data. Period.” LOL! They expect users to fall for that line?
foxhedgehog 9y ago
FTFY: https://imgur.com/b3QhEXq https://imgur.com/b3QhEXq
astonex 9y ago
How can non-users agree to having their data collected and stored.
paulie_a 9y ago
Facebook is an outright PR war attempting to deflect their NSA scale data collection. If Facebook went out of business tomorrow the world would be a better place.
exabrial 9y ago
I have no commerical interest, but I read http://MeWe.com http://MeWe.com manifesto on free speech and it's a platform I'm willing to support. If you guys are looking for a FB alternative, it seems to pass the sniff test. I'd be interested to hear opinions agreeing or disagreeing.
makecheck 9y ago
The presence of privacy “controls” isn’t very reassuring, even if Facebook were the most trustworthy organization in existence. Software has bugs. They can’t really prove that their closed implementation actually works in every case that it should (or more important, that their “controls” will continue to work after years of developer turnover, technical debt, etc.).
dcow 9y ago
The comments are full of personal anecdotes along the lines of "I've been to those meetups.", and "I worked at a place that bought that kind of data.", and the article: "everyone else does it". What's troubling me is the question, "what incentives do average employees in the tech industry have to operate in a morally admirable manner?". It seem very few, if any. Sure we lack explicit moral guidelines, but what if instead of, or in addition to, focusing on punishment of companies that get ugly, what if we incentivized employees to be respectful citizens? This isn't absolving capitalism of its flaws by any means, more it's acknowledging them. But punishing evil corp is so reactive. Why is the average employee so willing to sell out their fellow citizens, and ultimately themselves, for a paycheck? The obvious answer is, "it's a paycheck". But have we really lost all ability to hold a moral compass? I'd rather not believe that, so how do we calibrate at least a basic set of guidelines that actually effect change in a global industry? Other industries solve this problem with ethics boards and operating licenses. But other industries are arguably more localized. I also suspect many here would find such things anti-egalitarian and generally be against the idea. What other options exist? Note: I normally prefer reactive punishment because it doesn't impose worldviews and agendas on people--jury of peers makes punishment human, etc. I'm also somewhat morally relative, but it doesn't take a genius to understand that economically viable and moral are not equivalent. The issues of digital data privacy and data ownership are issues of fundamental human rights, and many of us operate under governments founded on principles defending such (point being I concede not everything is relative, and I think socially our efforts are best served defending things we have very little argument about).
- thinkingemote 9y ago
  Morally one could extend this to average employees in the tech industry whose work utilises online advertising. Whether buying ads, or putting ads on their services. I'm sure there are thousands of active and passionate Hacker News users, many reading these very words that support online advertising through their job. Perhaps they are wisely being quiet? Perhaps it's because the whole issue is murky and morally ambiguous. Now - one can make the case for ethical advertising... so why don't we?
textmode 9y ago
Up until now, wasn't Facebook collecting large quantities of data about users from data brokers? Why were they acquiring that data about users? In the leaked memo from a Facebook senior executive, what did he mean by "questionable contact importing practices"? Do contacts count as collected data? Why does Facebook collect contacts data, and why does FB collect it in ways that are "questionable"? Why are the contact importing practices questionable?
timvdalen 9y ago
Is it just me or is the tone of that article extremely condescending? I realize they feel like they are 'educating' people, but is this really the best tone to take when you are under such scrutiny?
herodotus 9y ago
> As Mark said last week, we believe everyone deserves good privacy controls. We require websites and apps who use our tools to tell you they’re collecting and sharing your information with us, and to get your permission to do so. I have NEVER been told by a website that they are doing this, let alone asking for my permission.
jk2323 9y ago
What helps protect you from this? Ghostery? uBlock? a decent hosts file?
- jan0e 9y ago
  Not sure about Ghostery and uBlock, but what definitely works is uMatrix. It gives you control over which third-party domain a website is allowed to contact. It makes browsing the web less convenient, though.
- aembleton 9y ago
  Privacy Badger - https://www.eff.org/privacybadger https://www.eff.org/privacybadger
shamaku 9y ago
Facebook is a proxy spy agency for the shadow government, just like Google, MS and Apple. Advertising income is just a front.
enesunal 9y ago
It's shame they didn't answer the question when the rumors came out.
rawland 9y ago
Can anybody post a pastebin or the the text of the page for the people blocking everything-FB on /etc/hosts level?
- devilmoon 9y ago
  https://pastebin.com/NJqLg1Pm https://pastebin.com/NJqLg1Pm
  - rawland 9y ago
    Thanks.
anotheryou 9y ago
"We use (...) the address of the website or app you’re using to make these features work." so basically most of my browser history for whatever things they they want.
StreamBright 9y ago
The real question is not what but why. I can think of several ways how the entire ad industry could be done without any data collection on users.
tallanvor 9y ago
> Ad preferences shows you the advertisers whose ads you might be seeing because you visited their sites or apps. You can remove any of these advertisers to stop seeing their ads. I want the ability to have this linkage severed permanently. If an advertiser uploads lists with my information, I want Facebook to pretend I don't exist for the purposes of matching me to ads.
laythea 9y ago
Everyone keep talking about Facebook, but what about the people who write our Operating Systems? Microsoft, Apple etc. Imagine the data that they have. Surely this whole Facebook privacy thing also applies, but I have not heard it mentioned once. What are we going to/can we do about the operating systems?
hovering 9y ago
Maybe the solution to this is the ghostery extension.
maxbaines 9y ago
Interesting the authors Facebook profile does not use default security settings I.e Friends, Photos and Videos require a Facebook login to view.
raggi 9y ago
Not one mention of Adobe here after 12 hours. Y'all ain't seen nothing yet. https://www.adobe.com/marketing-cloud.html https://www.adobe.com/marketing-cloud.html
creo 9y ago
There is no option to pay them to not see the ads. There is no option to pay them so they don't gather information about You. THEY OWN YOU. Even if Facebook gets out of business, other will do it. Your phone, your TV, watch, fucking juicer whatever connected to internet is collecting information. THERE IS NO WAY TO OPT-OUT. It may sound creepy and disconnected from reality, but in the core that's exactly what it is. You may not like it, You can disagree, but it happens anyway.
- dspillett 9y ago
  > There is no option to pay them so they don't gather information about You. I would absolutely 100% not trust that they wouldn't track me anyway. How could they not? Even if I trusted them (which I don't) it isn't possible: they'd at least need to know it was me where-ever I want so they'd know to not track me as I'd paid... Would you pay someone to not follow you down the street? If you did you'd have a queue of people following you to collect their "share".
  - creo 9y ago
    Yes. They need to identify You to know that You don't want to be tracked. Also DNT header is like laughable IT meme.
- igravious 9y ago
  Typing in BLOCK CAPS doesn't strengthen your argument.
  - creo 9y ago
    It's bold replacement.
    - igravious 9y ago
      “How Capital Letters Became Internet Code for Yelling” https://newrepublic.com/article/117390/netiquette-capitalization-how-caps-became-code-yelling https://newrepublic.com/article/117390/netiquette-capitaliza... There's a difference between emphasizing something and yelling it. You can use * (asterisk) or _ (underscore) surrounding a word or words for emphasis. Like this (asterisk) or _this_. As you can see, asterisks get interpreted by HN into italics. So maybe you can think of underscores as _bold_?
devilmoon 9y ago
Question: Will I be able to force Facebook to remove my shadow profile once GDPR goes live?
dspillett 9y ago
> What Data Does Facebook Collect When I’m Not Using Facebook Absolutely everything they possibly can. > and Why? Because they want to in order to wring every last fraction of a penny out of the worth you are as a data point to sell to everyone else. And because no one is stopping them.
WA 9y ago
Wow, wow, wow. - All others are doing it, so we're doing it, too and that's okay. - We collect data on you, even if you don't have an account - If you want to control your data, you need an account - Despite collecting even more (like your phone number, name and additional info) from your friend's address book they shared with us, we don't inform you about that and surely, there's no way for you to delete that info. Fuck you, Facebook.
DavideNL 9y ago
To get a list of ALL Facebook ip's to block them with your firewall: whois -h whois.radb.net '!gAS32934' | tr ' ' '\n' | awk '!/[[:alpha:]]/' > facebook.list whois -h whois.radb.net '!6AS32934' | tr ' ' '\n' | grep '::' >> facebook.list
antocv 9y ago
Hey HackerNews I remember back in 2009, 2010, Facebook was the cool still startup, still no IPO, tech company. Revolution. The social network. Social everything. There was people like me, even in 2007, warning about this. We said, how Obama got elected by using social media, reddit, twitter, facebook. Acting all cool. Was not a very transparent or open election, it can be misused and abused. Yet we, the paranoid warners, were dismissed as "US has privacy protection laws, this is a democracy, never would a company allow its data to be exported out just like that". Now, Trump is president and _now_ its not cool?
- kaybe 9y ago
  You're preaching to the choir.
jonbarker 9y ago
FB is building rich device profiles in order to crack down on fake profiles, which they call euphemistically 'security'.
campuscodi 9y ago
They could explain it, but I still don't like it. They should provide a setting that lets me disable off-site tracking. I shouldn't have to use a Firefox add-on to block their domains.
gavreh 9y ago
To Completely Block Facebook: https://github.com/jmdugan/blocklists/blob/master/corporations/facebook/all https://github.com/jmdugan/blocklists/blob/master/corporatio...
throwawaymanbot 9y ago
coughcouBullstcoughcough...
scotty79 9y ago
I'm very confused about outrage of technically competent people directed at Facebook now. It doesn't do anything more than any other large company is doing for more than a decade, since even before Google bought doubleclick and became ad company. I think HN crowd should be aware that Facebook gets this data and keeps this data in neat package along with all the information you volunteered exactly the same as any other company is doing starting from simplest e-commerce sites to huge e-commerce sites to ad networks to all social networks to largest current social network. Why the surprise? Why the outrage? That the data was gathered? That it was kept? That it was leaked? It's all inevitable. Next time you'll be angry at the sun.
jonbarker 9y ago
I don't see any mention of these URLs anywhere: https://github.com/jtbarker/nofbtracking/blob/master/blockfburls https://github.com/jtbarker/nofbtracking/blob/master/blockfb...

461 points by rock_hard 9y ago

shafyy 9y ago

FB does an amazing job in crisis management.

cag_ii 9y ago
How so?
- adventured 9y ago
  I hadn't considered it until that parent post. Compared to what I've seen out of Wall Street banks during the great recession, Equifax, shady lenders, mortgage scumbags, politicians, big tobacco, big oil, big sugar, GE & PCBs, CIA/Bush & torture, various Iraq war scandals, NSA spying scandal, Yahoo, Target, and about 407 other data, consumer, privacy breaches or abuses I've seen the last 20-30 years - Facebook gets high marks in this round for being very public about responding and tackling it head-on, but only after prior delay & evade maneuvers in the past. Most likely they recognized they were staring down a serious Congressional legislative/regulatory problem that could severely damage their business, and had no choice.
  - shafyy 9y ago
    Yes, that's what I mean. Thanks :-)
    - rawland 9y ago
      FB does an amazing job in crisis management at gunpoint?!
- moate 9y ago
  Going to assume OP was being sarcastic here
- shafyy 9y ago
  I'm not being sarcastic. - They are highly reactive, pushing a lot of new changes publicly (I know that the changes don't actually change anything, but from a PR perspective they do) - They are super apologetic and stand for their mistakes Now, it's, of course, impossible to say today if they are going to get better re privacy, but they definitely make the public impressions that they will. And that's a good response to the crises they're having. PS: This is a neutral observation of their actions
- bertil 9y ago
  Mark said he didn't have details about how data is collected outside of Facebook (and it is very likely that he expected to say something false or irrelevant -- and he did: data collection for security purposes is not personal) but that he will come back to it, and he delivers, under a week.

djrogers 9y ago

If one takes out all of the defensive posturing (entire paragraph explaining that Twitter, LinkedIn, Amazon, and Google all do the same thing), and the intentionally simplified (cookies, which are identifiers that websites use to know if you’ve visited before), we are left with this: Facebook tracks virtually every website you visit, as well as usage data from many apps, even if you aren't logged in to facebook or don't have an account. We use this data, and tie it to your identity whenever possible, so we can charge advertisers more money.

jdp23 9y ago
Good summary!
alexandercrohde 9y ago
And even if they claimed exactly otherwise, I wouldn't trust them. I'm not sure there's anything that can be done at this point to undo that distrust.
- rock_hard 9y ago
  You should ask yourself the question whether it was Facebook or the media that made you distrust Facebook. Because I can’t recall a single instance of when Facebook or Zuck lied to the public... but I recall plenty of lies the media has spread about Facebook
  - alexandercrohde 9y ago
    Someone doesn't have to lie to lose your trust.
IshKebab 9y ago
Yeah when you put it like that it sounds bad, but Facebook really are right that literally every other advertiser on the planet does exactly the same thing. Honestly I think the bigger issue is that Facebook tracks you on third party sites when you are logged in to Facebook - in those cases they easily know your exact identity. Most advertisers can't do that. Google could, but I'm not sure if they do or not.

awakeasleep 9y ago

Nothing mentioned about the fact that with all your friend's address books, they have a node for you on the social network graph, even if it's implied.

Angostura 9y ago
Since FB owns WhatsApp, I'm sure it's pretty explicit, not implied.

thijser 9y ago

"When you visit a site or app that uses our services, we receive information even if you’re logged out or don’t have a Facebook account." Then at the end under "What controls do I have": "you can opt out of these types of ads entirely — so you never see ads on Facebook based on information we have received from other websites and apps." Except that that's only possible when you're logged in. The link they provide doesn't work for logged out users. It seems they don't provide any control tools for logged out users/non Facebook users.

mgummelt 9y ago
The type of ads you see on FB is only relevant to FB users.
- gervase 9y ago
  Then I seem not to understand the benefit they see from tracking non-users' information - how can this be of benefit to advertisers if these users are never targeted? In particular, what benefits would be generated by linking this tracking information with the real identify of a non-FB user (that couldn't also be leveraged in a semi-anonymous way)? In other words, I see the benefit to FB of being able to say "Person A likes 1, 2, 3; User B likes 1 and 2 - perhaps they also like 3?" where A is a non-user and B is a FB user, but I don't see the benefit derived from identifying Person A to advertisers if they can only target that person on FB, where they aren't a user?
  - mgummelt 9y ago
    They don't allow advertisers to target non-users. I'm sure they use non-user data for clustering, just as you described. They also probably use it when the user finally does create a FB account.
- thijser 9y ago
  Facebook also has the audience network, which serves ads on other websites and apps.
9y ago

cag_ii 9y ago

It's interesting that the "Privacy Controls" seem to only change how you see the data they've collected about you, but doesn't seem to change how or when they collect data about you. That doesn't sound like privacy control at all!

mgummelt 9y ago

> We require websites and apps who use our tools to tell you they’re collecting and sharing your information with us, and to get your permission to do so. Am I missing something or does this line conflict with the rest of the post?

cag_ii 9y ago
I think the technical term for this is "Passing the buck"...

mikestew 9y ago

All I know is that the Pi-Hole at our house says Facebook domains are blocked way more than anything Google has running (w/o the numbers in front of me, I wouldn't be surprised if it's an order of magnitude difference). And neither one of us has a FB account, that's just from the craplets littering your average web page. Kudos to FB for posting this in understandable languague. OTOH, it does have the scent of trying to get ahead of $SOMETHING.

Someone 9y ago

“We give you a number of controls over the way this data is used” “You can remove any of these advertisers to stop seeing their ads.” “Finally, if you don’t want us to use your Facebook interests to show you ads on other websites and apps, there’s a control for that too” Reading that critically, there doesn’t seem to be any way for Facebook users to control what data Facebook collects. I wonder whether that page will change due to the GDPR.

kristianc 9y ago
Facebook would legitimately be able to argue that the ad targeting is part of their core product, the ads are critical to the function of the website, and that you agree to have your data processed by signing up.
- rickycook 9y ago
  remove ads from facebook and you still have the functionality of facebook that their “data subjects” care about so that’s likely a no. you could probably not argue that successfully *edit: with that being said, i’m almost certain that there will be some way people find to offer ads and targeting with the GDPR
- Angostura 9y ago
  From my understanding of the GDPR, no I really don't think that they would be able to argue that, actually. Particularly when I'm not logged into their site.
  - zjs 9y ago
    IANAL, but I think it depends on what data they collect. Part of running any advertising business is accurately billing the advertisers. To do that, they need to measure enough information to track viewed impressions, click-through rate, etc. If they collect only enough information to perform business functions like these, I believe that would constitute a legal basis for processing under the GDPR. They may have a harder time using that justification for information that is only needed for ad targeting. In that case, consent may be an easier legal basis for them to establish, for which an account would be useful.

bamboozled 9y ago

This is getting so ridiculous, I really dislike how Facebook is using the issues of late as a way to "reeducate" people on how it's ok to be doing what it's doing. It's not ok, and not acceptable. It's a shame we've allowed a web to be built which allows for this kind of exploitation. I'm also acutely aware that it's not just Facebook.

TheCapn 9y ago
I'm not entirely convinced that if we had a chance to do it over that we wouldn't just repeat the same mistakes. Are there other massively profitable businesses that are free to users without some form of exploitation? Advertising and the industry that surrounds it is absolutely tainted as they chase analytics to make each set of eyeballs most profitable to themselves. How do we get "free" services while also having great privacy control in a way that the company can operate at a scale like Google or Facebook?
- kerkeslager 9y ago
  > How do we get "free" services while also having great privacy control in a way that the company can operate at a scale like Google or Facebook? Can you justify why we as a society should want companies to operate at a scale like Google or Facebook?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
    > Can you justify why we as a society should want companies to operate at a scale like Google or Facebook? The simple (and inevitable) solution is to break up Facebook. No need to even get that complicated, at least to start: Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp.
    - kartan 9y ago
      > The simple (and inevitable) solution is to break up Facebook. There was a time when anti monopoly laws were taken seriously. That you are the number one social network should not be used to also become a big player on advertising, selling items, casual games, etc. Letting companies leverage on a monopoly to gain other markets is dangerous for the economy.

iaskwhy 9y ago

Very useful link in the article showing some of the things Facebook knows about you: https://facebook.com/ads/preferences https://facebook.com/ads/preferences

hylianwarrior 9y ago
Only works if you have an account.

aestetix 9y ago

Two questions Facebook needs to answer: 1. If I don't have a Facebook account, how can I delete the data Facebook has collected on me without creating an account? 2. If Facebook doesn't sell data, what is the purpose of shadow profiles?

submeta 9y ago
+1
sebleon 9y ago
1. You can’t. They didn’t have an incentive to prioritize this on product roadmap, at least not until now. 2. Most likely to jump start new accounts. They’ll be able to target ads at your new account better if they already have years of data about your interests.
- kartan 9y ago
  > at least not until now. They have it to finish before the GDPR enforcement date (25 May 2018) - at which time those organizations in non-compliance may face heavy fines. So, all companies big and small need to have a good data governance that allows to delete data on demand. And, better than that, stop collecting any data that they don’t have been authorized to get. https://www.eugdpr.org https://www.eugdpr.org
flatline 9y ago
When asked question 2 before the US Congress, he repeatedly said that it's for security reasons, something about identifying attackers. It sounded to me like a corporate version of crying "national defense!" They really need to give a full accounting of what those are used for.
clarkenheim 9y ago
If Facebook need to answer this question then so do Google, Twitter, Amazon and basically anyone else with a big enough footprint.
drb91 9y ago

denzil_correa 9y ago

All of this misses the key questions : Where does Facebook use the data explicitly and for what explicit purpose? Will Facebook notify every time data is used and in what capacity? Why or why not?

jumelles 9y ago

The only possible way a page like this could be a good idea if it just said "We collect no data" - otherwise it's a bad answer that just doesn't play well.

marze 9y ago

They may not know everything about everyone, but they are working on it. $500B market cap: the market thinks they will succeed.

majordroid 9y ago

> The browser shares your IP address so the website knows where on the internet to send the site content. Huh?!?

freeone3000 9y ago
This is "internet is a series of pipes" logic, but it's technically true - it's used for TCP routing. Why is it bubbled up the layers? Why does facebook store it? Well, it's not as if you can do anything with it. It's not even a great identifier, due to mobile networks, carrier-grade NAT, dynamic IPs... But it certainly shouldn't be treated as private, any more than your home address.

muglug 9y ago

> Ad Measurement. An advertiser can choose to add the Facebook Pixel, some computer code, to their site. This allows us to give advertisers stats about how many people are responding to their ads — even if they saw the ad on a different device — without us sharing anyone’s personal information. So I can look at an ad in Mobile Safari, and go to the advertiser's website in Chrome on my mac, and Facebook counts that as a referral, because I'm logged into FB on both browsers. Makes sense, but sort of creepy.

lolc 9y ago

> We don’t sell people’s data. Period. You just share it for a fee?

tested24 9y ago
Do you not understand how platform apis work? If you sign up for a third party app using Facebook and give them permission to access all your data you should expect them to capture all of your data
- lolc 9y ago
  Are you sure everybody who clicked "ok" was aware of the distinction? Pointing the finger at their contractors is an easy way for Facebook to shift blame. They knew what was going on. And they eagerly participated on their side of the deal.
  - tested24 9y ago
    Shift blame? Facebook created an API that would allow people to create genuinely useful apps provided that users allowed them to access their data. I can think of a thousand interesting use cases for the data Facebook provided through their api. One bad actor screwed everyone. I'm surprised at how few people on hackernews have ever built or worked with apis. Facebook essentially built an open platform and now they are being punished for it because people are too stupid to understand what they are signing up for.
    - lolc 9y ago
      I may deplore that people are falling for a fraud, but I will still hold the fraudster in contempt. Not the people. So please don't call people stupid. They're up against something they are not prepared to understand. The Facebook API needs special quarantine whenever I work with it. To protect my users.
      - tested24 9y ago

AdmiralAsshat 9y ago

> What controls do I have? > As Mark said last week, we believe everyone deserves good privacy controls. We require websites and apps who use our tools to tell you they’re collecting and sharing your information with us, and to get your permission to do so. Bullshit. I downloaded Facebook's data on me and found about 40 websites they said they had shared my profile with. I didn't authorize that. FB doesn't give me the ability to "revoke" permission to have my info shared with them, either. Nor does it allow me to request that the information on me given to those third parties be deleted.

bertil 9y ago
Actually, you absolutely can on https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/ https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/ - Advertisers you've interacted with - - Who have added their contact list to Facebook Hover over those you don’t know about; the X let you “Remove” those, i.e. ask Facebook to exclude you from those advertisers’ targeting. If you are in Europe, you should be able, starting next month, to leverage that list to ask those advertisers how they got your data, and expose data brokers. Facebook is simply (finally) offering you the ability to track data brokers.
- trendia 9y ago
  Once the data has been given to a third party, we can no longer be guaranteed that the third party will delete it. That was one of the main problems with Cambridge Analytica -- they claimed to have deleted data but may not have actually done so.
idunno246 9y ago
Any company can upload a list of email addresses to facebook and say they have a relationship with you and then facebook will allow that company to market you. Its obviously against ToS to go out and purchase a list of emails and upload it to facebook and show those people ads. But uh, facebook can't prevent that without killing the feature. So in this case its not facebook sharing data, but companies lying to facebook and facebook going along with it to get paid.
9y ago

fenwick67 9y ago

> Social plugins, such as our Like and Share buttons, which make other sites more social and help you share content on Facebook; It's very disengenuous of them to mention that they collect data on you whether you click the button or not.

mverwijs 9y ago
Not to mention having the gal to call it 'being social'. War is peace. Invading privacy is social.

troupe 9y ago

> In addition, you can opt out of these types of ads entirely — so you never see ads on Facebook based on information we have received from other websites and apps. They have this listed as a privacy control, but it doesn't provide any way to tell them to not compile a list of the other sites you visit outside of Facebook.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

mhneu 9y ago

The most important question is about "informed consent". Yes, users consented to giving data to facebook. But they did so via a convoluted click-through legal agreement, which almost no one reads, and which denies Facebook access if you decline. Then they can use your data for what are human subject experiments. If any other human subject experiment was proposed to a review board with that kind of consent form, it would be laughed out of the room, at best. No way would that be allowed. "Informed consent" is what Facebook -- and other data companies -- should be seeking. We already have this concept for data and user protection in research. We should just extend it to the private sector.

makecheck 9y ago

Whatever we consider “data” right now quite simply needs to be thrown out, replaced by things that are MUCH more temporary (e.g. where even the largest “collection” of data becomes useless within a week). And, access needs to be explicitly revocable at any time by either party. There should actually be a difference between, say, me giving you “phone number” and me giving anyone else “phone number” (directly or indirectly). Heck, even for my street address I’d feel better if I only gave out keys that everyone had to cash in at the post office and let the post office convert it to my real house number. There is no technical excuse at this point to have so many different bits of sensitive information floating around. And many of these pieces of information are permanently associated with you, meaning that any slip-up anywhere at any time can create a problem later on.

Rafuino 9y ago

Just spent 20 valuable minutes blocking ads from all the random companies, political campaigns, and celebrities who've somehow gotten hold of my contact information and added me to their list. Americans for Prosperity had me on their list for ~30 states, and that's just one of scores of organizations that I've absolutely never dealt with or wanted to provide my information. What I want to know is WHO sold/shared my information to these organizations in the first place. I'd also love for FB to give me to option to hide all their ads without clicking on every.single.one (again, there were hundreds of them...)!

QuadrupleA 9y ago

Shameless plug, I have a little open-source social sharing icons project that doesn't allow FB or any other services to track your website's users unless they choose to share something: https://github.com/QuadrupleA/private-secure-sharing-buttons https://github.com/QuadrupleA/private-secure-sharing-buttons

mirimir 9y ago

> What controls do I have? David neglected to mention that one can easily mark facebook.com as untrusted in NoScript. Ditto for linkedin.com, google-analytics.com, etc.

cJ0th 9y ago
> David neglected to mention that one can easily mark facebook.com as untrusted in NoScript. but don't they use hundreds of other domains for tracking that you may not even know?
- mirimir 9y ago
  In NoScript, I allow only domains needed to minimally render the page.

PapaPug 9y ago

Curious -- how many here, knowing what they know now, have gone through the trouble of deleting their FB accounts?

devilmoon 9y ago
I did and honestly never felt better - now I'm just waiting to find out if through GDPR i'll be able to force them to remove every last bit of data they have about me.
- PapaPug 9y ago
  I did as well.

wollstonecraft 9y ago

Is there any way to keep the faceberg android apps from starting on their own after you've force-stopped them?

suyash 9y ago
Nope this is a system level feature in Android where services can constantly run on the background.
junnan 9y ago
Uninstall and use chrome version.
- milcron 9y ago
  On some phones, Facebook comes preinstalled as a system-level app that cannot be uninstalled. Idk what to recommend other than getting a phone that doesn't do that to you.
  - jpl56 9y ago
    On my phone, I never logged in to Facebook through the app and deactivated it and use the website, I hope it's sufficient.
aembleton 9y ago
Settings > Battery > Background activity manager Find it in the list and switch it off. I'm running Android 8.1.0 so YMMV

suyash 9y ago

Anyone noticed there comment got deleted from that blog post. I posted my comment using Facebook login but it's not there anymore.

troncjb 9y ago

One thing missing from this entire conversation: I personally signed up for Facebook at the age of 14. In fact, my friend made it for me and I took it over after he successfully harangued me into using it. I never, as an adult, consented to this statutory data rape.

devilmoon 9y ago
This is something really important to consider: Should Facebook be allowed only for 18+ people? If I remember correctly they allow 13yo and up to sign up and I don't think they have the legal abiliy to consent to this level of data sharing

askvictor 9y ago

At what point does should web-browsers start to interfere with this data collection? I'm aware of extensions that do this, but the average user isn't going to install one (or remember to reinstall it after they've got a new computer). The Do-Not-Track header seems to be dead in the water - should browsers make a more aggressive move against this? It's obviously a conflict of interest for Google (since they both have a competing product to FB, and like to do a heap of similar data collection themselves) as well as a possible Anti-trust concern; but Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft could be stepping in here.

TheForumTroll 9y ago
Firefox has containers and a special one just for Facebook. Apple will only do so if the have a way to get money out of it.
- ec109685 9y ago
  If you never go to Facebook, Safari will prevent Facebook from building a profile across the sites you visit. For each parent site, Facebook will receive different cookies, which defeats their system.

phtrackingthrow 9y ago

Throwaway for reasons. My wife and I enjoy porn in our relationship. On my birthday last year, we were settling in for some, romance, and we open up pornhub only to find ads trying to entice me into a discount subscription for my birthday. They knew it was my birthday! Which, really freaked me out because: 1) I don't have or never have had an account with them. I've never given them my age and birthday. In fact, I never give out my birthday on the internet. I don't even have a Facebook, twitter, or any other social media account. 2) It was on my wife's tablet. I never ever use her tablet, especially for browsing porn. Anyone have an idea the machinery involved in making this determination?

artificial 9y ago
Just a hunch, if you were accessing from home, most likely your IP address.
movedx 9y ago
If you have two devices in a house and one never accesses Google and the other does, Google will know it's you using the non-Google device each and every time. There's more to mining you then cookies and tracking pixels. They use IPs, hardware and software profiling, behavioural patterns, and even the way you type on your keyboard (this is very, very accurate.) In short: you need a "clean room" (Tails) every time you go online and you need to change where you're coming online from (VPN). You can also use tools to change your keyboard/typing "profile" so as to cripple that means of tracking. Oh and you can't login to virtually any online account at all, ever, because these cookies can be used too.
- rcraft 9y ago
  So if you use a VPN and incognito mode without logging into any online account, Google, Facebook, et al can still track you accurately? Curious any other tools besides vpn and private mode you would recommend? Any more links to read about these behaviorial, software and and type style tracking methods?
  - 9y ago

sakopov 9y ago

They track everything because others do it too. They also seem to imply that it's a totally normal thing for anyone to be doing this. The tone of this piece is really astounding.

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

When I'm at Target I kinda expect them to keep an eye on things I buy and let me know of things I might want to buy. What I don't like is when they follow me over to Panera and look over my shoulder at what I'm ordering there. I think that crosses a line.

rootlocus 9y ago
What if Panera installed special cameras provided by Target?

marcell 9y ago

Contrary to most comments here, it is significant that other companies do. Facebook competes in the free market. If they scale back on data collection, that will hurt their offering to advertisers and cost them money that will go to Google and others. That lost revenue will harm their ability to retain talent and build new products, and ultimately cost them their user base. “We don’t track you” is not as compelling a feature as “free video chat across the globe.” Facebook doesn’t operate in a vacuum. They can’t scale back data collection unless others do. Moreover, the United States doesn’t exist in a vacuum either. Scaling back all US companies will give a leg up to competitors in more lenient jurisdictions.

2trill2spill 9y ago
Also I don't think most people would be willing to pay for Facebook which would be the alternative to surveillance and advertising.
raz32dust 9y ago
This is an important point and I wonder about it often. Especially the last one about countries that are lax on individual privacy. Imagine what China or Chinese companies could do with the genetic information they collect from their population. The lack of regulation is scary, but at the same time, they will be at the forefront of genetic engineering and designer humans. Can't think of any solution other than a World government. EU and AU has shown it is possible.
- jamiek88 9y ago
  Is a world government necessarily a bad thing? A union of federated states globally could be a significant force for good. Impossible for the forseeable future of course but why immediately dismissed as a scary outcome?
  - raz32dust 9y ago
    I meant it as a good thing. Some things will need to be regulated at the global level. We are already seeing global problems - global warming being the prime example. I think we will end up either destroying ourselves or end up with a world government. World government will clearly be the better outcome. How that government works would also be an interesting topic for science fiction. Hint: I don't think it will be a democracy.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

intrasight 9y ago

Even if I keeled over dead tomorrow, FB would be collecting about me via all my still-living family and friends.

harry8 9y ago

"other people mug passers by too!" Can we just avoid this defence. The first one you catch, you prosecute fully and punish appropriately according to justice. Almost nobody knowingly signed up to be tracked everywhere they visit on the internet. Hiding it in fine print is every bit a con. You have ensure your conterparty understands the full extent of the contract or you have fraudulently obtained consent. Facebook now. They should be fully prosecuted. Then we catch the next crook, and the one after until the lawlessness is dealt with.

natch 9y ago

“We don’t sell people’s data. Period.” LOL! They expect users to fall for that line?

foxhedgehog 9y ago

FTFY: https://imgur.com/b3QhEXq https://imgur.com/b3QhEXq

astonex 9y ago

How can non-users agree to having their data collected and stored.

paulie_a 9y ago

Facebook is an outright PR war attempting to deflect their NSA scale data collection. If Facebook went out of business tomorrow the world would be a better place.

exabrial 9y ago

I have no commerical interest, but I read http://MeWe.com http://MeWe.com manifesto on free speech and it's a platform I'm willing to support. If you guys are looking for a FB alternative, it seems to pass the sniff test. I'd be interested to hear opinions agreeing or disagreeing.

makecheck 9y ago

The presence of privacy “controls” isn’t very reassuring, even if Facebook were the most trustworthy organization in existence. Software has bugs. They can’t really prove that their closed implementation actually works in every case that it should (or more important, that their “controls” will continue to work after years of developer turnover, technical debt, etc.).

dcow 9y ago

The comments are full of personal anecdotes along the lines of "I've been to those meetups.", and "I worked at a place that bought that kind of data.", and the article: "everyone else does it". What's troubling me is the question, "what incentives do average employees in the tech industry have to operate in a morally admirable manner?". It seem very few, if any. Sure we lack explicit moral guidelines, but what if instead of, or in addition to, focusing on punishment of companies that get ugly, what if we incentivized employees to be respectful citizens? This isn't absolving capitalism of its flaws by any means, more it's acknowledging them. But punishing evil corp is so reactive. Why is the average employee so willing to sell out their fellow citizens, and ultimately themselves, for a paycheck? The obvious answer is, "it's a paycheck". But have we really lost all ability to hold a moral compass? I'd rather not believe that, so how do we calibrate at least a basic set of guidelines that actually effect change in a global industry? Other industries solve this problem with ethics boards and operating licenses. But other industries are arguably more localized. I also suspect many here would find such things anti-egalitarian and generally be against the idea. What other options exist? Note: I normally prefer reactive punishment because it doesn't impose worldviews and agendas on people--jury of peers makes punishment human, etc. I'm also somewhat morally relative, but it doesn't take a genius to understand that economically viable and moral are not equivalent. The issues of digital data privacy and data ownership are issues of fundamental human rights, and many of us operate under governments founded on principles defending such (point being I concede not everything is relative, and I think socially our efforts are best served defending things we have very little argument about).

thinkingemote 9y ago
Morally one could extend this to average employees in the tech industry whose work utilises online advertising. Whether buying ads, or putting ads on their services. I'm sure there are thousands of active and passionate Hacker News users, many reading these very words that support online advertising through their job. Perhaps they are wisely being quiet? Perhaps it's because the whole issue is murky and morally ambiguous. Now - one can make the case for ethical advertising... so why don't we?

textmode 9y ago

Up until now, wasn't Facebook collecting large quantities of data about users from data brokers? Why were they acquiring that data about users? In the leaked memo from a Facebook senior executive, what did he mean by "questionable contact importing practices"? Do contacts count as collected data? Why does Facebook collect contacts data, and why does FB collect it in ways that are "questionable"? Why are the contact importing practices questionable?

timvdalen 9y ago

Is it just me or is the tone of that article extremely condescending? I realize they feel like they are 'educating' people, but is this really the best tone to take when you are under such scrutiny?

herodotus 9y ago

> As Mark said last week, we believe everyone deserves good privacy controls. We require websites and apps who use our tools to tell you they’re collecting and sharing your information with us, and to get your permission to do so. I have NEVER been told by a website that they are doing this, let alone asking for my permission.

jk2323 9y ago

What helps protect you from this? Ghostery? uBlock? a decent hosts file?

jan0e 9y ago
Not sure about Ghostery and uBlock, but what definitely works is uMatrix. It gives you control over which third-party domain a website is allowed to contact. It makes browsing the web less convenient, though.
aembleton 9y ago
Privacy Badger - https://www.eff.org/privacybadger https://www.eff.org/privacybadger

shamaku 9y ago

Facebook is a proxy spy agency for the shadow government, just like Google, MS and Apple. Advertising income is just a front.

enesunal 9y ago

It's shame they didn't answer the question when the rumors came out.

rawland 9y ago

Can anybody post a pastebin or the the text of the page for the people blocking everything-FB on /etc/hosts level?

devilmoon 9y ago
https://pastebin.com/NJqLg1Pm https://pastebin.com/NJqLg1Pm
- rawland 9y ago
  Thanks.

anotheryou 9y ago

"We use (...) the address of the website or app you’re using to make these features work." so basically most of my browser history for whatever things they they want.

StreamBright 9y ago

The real question is not what but why. I can think of several ways how the entire ad industry could be done without any data collection on users.

tallanvor 9y ago

> Ad preferences shows you the advertisers whose ads you might be seeing because you visited their sites or apps. You can remove any of these advertisers to stop seeing their ads. I want the ability to have this linkage severed permanently. If an advertiser uploads lists with my information, I want Facebook to pretend I don't exist for the purposes of matching me to ads.

laythea 9y ago

Everyone keep talking about Facebook, but what about the people who write our Operating Systems? Microsoft, Apple etc. Imagine the data that they have. Surely this whole Facebook privacy thing also applies, but I have not heard it mentioned once. What are we going to/can we do about the operating systems?

hovering 9y ago

Maybe the solution to this is the ghostery extension.

maxbaines 9y ago

Interesting the authors Facebook profile does not use default security settings I.e Friends, Photos and Videos require a Facebook login to view.

raggi 9y ago

Not one mention of Adobe here after 12 hours. Y'all ain't seen nothing yet. https://www.adobe.com/marketing-cloud.html https://www.adobe.com/marketing-cloud.html

creo 9y ago

There is no option to pay them to not see the ads. There is no option to pay them so they don't gather information about You. THEY OWN YOU. Even if Facebook gets out of business, other will do it. Your phone, your TV, watch, fucking juicer whatever connected to internet is collecting information. THERE IS NO WAY TO OPT-OUT. It may sound creepy and disconnected from reality, but in the core that's exactly what it is. You may not like it, You can disagree, but it happens anyway.

dspillett 9y ago
> There is no option to pay them so they don't gather information about You. I would absolutely 100% not trust that they wouldn't track me anyway. How could they not? Even if I trusted them (which I don't) it isn't possible: they'd at least need to know it was me where-ever I want so they'd know to not track me as I'd paid... Would you pay someone to not follow you down the street? If you did you'd have a queue of people following you to collect their "share".
- creo 9y ago
  Yes. They need to identify You to know that You don't want to be tracked. Also DNT header is like laughable IT meme.
igravious 9y ago
Typing in BLOCK CAPS doesn't strengthen your argument.
- creo 9y ago
  It's bold replacement.
  - igravious 9y ago
    “How Capital Letters Became Internet Code for Yelling” https://newrepublic.com/article/117390/netiquette-capitalization-how-caps-became-code-yelling https://newrepublic.com/article/117390/netiquette-capitaliza... There's a difference between emphasizing something and yelling it. You can use * (asterisk) or _ (underscore) surrounding a word or words for emphasis. Like this (asterisk) or _this_. As you can see, asterisks get interpreted by HN into italics. So maybe you can think of underscores as _bold_?

devilmoon 9y ago

Question: Will I be able to force Facebook to remove my shadow profile once GDPR goes live?

dspillett 9y ago

> What Data Does Facebook Collect When I’m Not Using Facebook Absolutely everything they possibly can. > and Why? Because they want to in order to wring every last fraction of a penny out of the worth you are as a data point to sell to everyone else. And because no one is stopping them.

WA 9y ago

Wow, wow, wow. - All others are doing it, so we're doing it, too and that's okay. - We collect data on you, even if you don't have an account - If you want to control your data, you need an account - Despite collecting even more (like your phone number, name and additional info) from your friend's address book they shared with us, we don't inform you about that and surely, there's no way for you to delete that info. Fuck you, Facebook.

DavideNL 9y ago

To get a list of ALL Facebook ip's to block them with your firewall: whois -h whois.radb.net '!gAS32934' | tr ' ' '\n' | awk '!/[[:alpha:]]/' > facebook.list whois -h whois.radb.net '!6AS32934' | tr ' ' '\n' | grep '::' >> facebook.list

antocv 9y ago

Hey HackerNews I remember back in 2009, 2010, Facebook was the cool still startup, still no IPO, tech company. Revolution. The social network. Social everything. There was people like me, even in 2007, warning about this. We said, how Obama got elected by using social media, reddit, twitter, facebook. Acting all cool. Was not a very transparent or open election, it can be misused and abused. Yet we, the paranoid warners, were dismissed as "US has privacy protection laws, this is a democracy, never would a company allow its data to be exported out just like that". Now, Trump is president and _now_ its not cool?

kaybe 9y ago
You're preaching to the choir.

jonbarker 9y ago

FB is building rich device profiles in order to crack down on fake profiles, which they call euphemistically 'security'.

campuscodi 9y ago

They could explain it, but I still don't like it. They should provide a setting that lets me disable off-site tracking. I shouldn't have to use a Firefox add-on to block their domains.

gavreh 9y ago

To Completely Block Facebook: https://github.com/jmdugan/blocklists/blob/master/corporations/facebook/all https://github.com/jmdugan/blocklists/blob/master/corporatio...

throwawaymanbot 9y ago

coughcouBullstcoughcough...

scotty79 9y ago

I'm very confused about outrage of technically competent people directed at Facebook now. It doesn't do anything more than any other large company is doing for more than a decade, since even before Google bought doubleclick and became ad company. I think HN crowd should be aware that Facebook gets this data and keeps this data in neat package along with all the information you volunteered exactly the same as any other company is doing starting from simplest e-commerce sites to huge e-commerce sites to ad networks to all social networks to largest current social network. Why the surprise? Why the outrage? That the data was gathered? That it was kept? That it was leaked? It's all inevitable. Next time you'll be angry at the sun.

jonbarker 9y ago

I don't see any mention of these URLs anywhere: https://github.com/jtbarker/nofbtracking/blob/master/blockfburls https://github.com/jtbarker/nofbtracking/blob/master/blockfb...