4 ms·

>In order to run a “Paid for by” disclosure on Facebook, you must first submit the name to the company for approval, along with an image of a valid driver’s lic

by Zyst 8y ago

>In order to run a “Paid for by” disclosure on Facebook, you must first submit the name to the company for approval, along with an image of a valid driver’s license and the last four digits of your Social Security number. Paragraph in question. Are the driver's licences they used not the ones of the Senators? Or maybe they photoshopped them, or something along those lines? I'm a bit unhappy at the lack of elaboration on the methodology they used to test this out.

TazeTSchnitzel 8y ago
That they say a valid driver's license makes it sound like it doesn't have to be the senator in question's.
- bryanrasmussen 8y ago
  Hi, my name is John Validdriver and I work for senator Schmuck's office!
waisbrot 8y ago
Yes, it's difficult to follow exactly what they did. This: > We used 10 fake Facebook pages with no content, and changed the “paid for” disclosure after each senator was approved. Makes it sound to me like they got approval using a real identity and then changed the now-approved account to use a different name. Methodology aside, though, Facebook shouldn't be showing that they verified the identity if they did not verify the identity. Unless the methodology was "we stole the identities of some senators" or "we cracked their passwords", this is a failure a another breach of trust on Facebook's part.
- gopher2 8y ago
  Based on other's comments in the thread about having their advertisements not approved by FB, it sounds like Facebook does have an approval process that is greater than just "literally not Mark Zuckerberg". However, Vice got around this by getting an ad approved and then editing (changing entirely?) the name and other properties of the ad. Maybe Facebook should re-approve ads when certain properties change? It's definitely impersonation... I'm not sure what officially constitutes stealing an identity. I'd be curious how this experiment of impersonating a senator and buying advertising would go across print/billboards/reddit/other platforms. Maybe Vice will try some more experiments.
xkcd-sucks 8y ago
In any case, senators aren't actually running ads, their staff are. So it requires a real background check

by Zyst 8y ago

TazeTSchnitzel 8y ago

That they say a valid driver's license makes it sound like it doesn't have to be the senator in question's.

bryanrasmussen 8y ago
Hi, my name is John Validdriver and I work for senator Schmuck's office!

waisbrot 8y ago

Yes, it's difficult to follow exactly what they did. This: > We used 10 fake Facebook pages with no content, and changed the “paid for” disclosure after each senator was approved. Makes it sound to me like they got approval using a real identity and then changed the now-approved account to use a different name. Methodology aside, though, Facebook shouldn't be showing that they verified the identity if they did not verify the identity. Unless the methodology was "we stole the identities of some senators" or "we cracked their passwords", this is a failure a another breach of trust on Facebook's part.

gopher2 8y ago
Based on other's comments in the thread about having their advertisements not approved by FB, it sounds like Facebook does have an approval process that is greater than just "literally not Mark Zuckerberg". However, Vice got around this by getting an ad approved and then editing (changing entirely?) the name and other properties of the ad. Maybe Facebook should re-approve ads when certain properties change? It's definitely impersonation... I'm not sure what officially constitutes stealing an identity. I'd be curious how this experiment of impersonating a senator and buying advertising would go across print/billboards/reddit/other platforms. Maybe Vice will try some more experiments.

xkcd-sucks 8y ago

In any case, senators aren't actually running ads, their staff are. So it requires a real background check