5 ms·

Apple's app sandboxing and privacy protection means that 'Facebook for iPad' will not be able to mine as much user data as Facebook would like. I suspect that

by credo 15y ago

Apple's app sandboxing and privacy protection means that 'Facebook for iPad' will not be able to mine as much user data as Facebook would like. I suspect that this was the main reason why Facebook wanted users to use the browser instead of a native app (and why the app is being launched more than 18 months after the iPad was first launched) However, the proliferation of native 3rd party apps meant that users weren't using the browser to get to Facebook and that may have led Facebook to finally decide to release the app. [edit1: To the downvoters - I didn't say that sandboxing provides 100% privacy protection. However, it does prevent Facebook from knowing which other sites you've visited, it prevents them from telling search engines who you are etc.] [edit2: To Xuzz and others: login to facebook on your iPad browser, log into a website that collaborates with Facebook, you'll see that Facebook is aware your visit to the website. This won't happen when you're logged into the app (instead of being logged in on Safari) Regardless of the downvotes, this is a matter of fact.(in fact, it was recently discovered that Facebook can track some of your web-browsing even if you had logged out) Btw I made no assertions about "attacks" and I have no interest in debating emotional outburts such as "Please stop assuming everything Facebook does is out to personally attack you or your data".

martingordon 15y ago
> Apple's app sandboxing and privacy protection means that 'Facebook for iPad' will not be able to mine as much user data as Facebook would like. Sandboxing does prevent developers from accessing files that don't belong to their apps but developers still have unfettered access to users' calendars and address book. Facebook has already been known to grab users' address books from the iPhone version of the app.
- Xuzz 15y ago
  Only after explicitly agreeing to share the information with a pretty explicit and huge warning message: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4001/4352706085_5a6e467b50.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4001/4352706085_5a6e467b50.jp... Seriously, I am getting tired of these outright lies or unsubstantiated rumors being perpetutated against Facebook.
  - Bud 15y ago
    As if one obligatory click-thru obviates any responsibility for what Facebook does. Please. Don't make me laugh. BTW, on the way back to your cubicle at Facebook, wave hi to Zuck for me!
    - Xuzz 15y ago
      I do not work at Facebook or even know a single person who does. I've never even talked to someone — including on the Internet — who works for Facebook. Your personal attack was incredibly uncalled for. Just because I do not feel Facebook is evil does not mean that they are paying me to say so. (As to your actual point: yes, it actually does. The claim I was refuting is that Facebook "steals" contact information on your device. Well, in fact, it doesn't. It makes you confirm that you are okay with sharing this information with Facebook. What else could they do? The only other thing I could think of is Facebook not offering this feature. They are doing quite a good job here making it clear what happens to your information if you share it with them and you have to explicitly give your okay.)
      - potatolicious 15y ago
        > "What else could they do? The only other thing I could think of is Facebook not offering this feature." "Your friend [Bob Smith] wants to use Facebook Mobile Sync on his phone. This would allow Facebook to see any information he has in his address book relating to you. You can [learn more about Facebook Mobile Sync here]." > "They are doing quite a good job here making it clear what happens to your information if you share it with them and you have to explicitly give your okay." There are two issues with this: - There is a social contract (at least, in Western countries, I cannot speak for this as a universal rule) where your contact information is private. This is why people ask "is it ok if I give Bob your number?". Facebook violates this fundamental assumption by allowing Bob to unilaterally upload all this private data with a simple button push, without clearing it with anyone. - The fact that we had viral outrage when people's private numbers started showing up on accounts seems to suggest that they have not explained the use of this information sufficiently. If people are quite clear about what happens to this information, there would have been little cause for outrage. That prompt doesn't really make clear what information Facebook will roll into its databases, nor does it make clear in what way it is exposed. The only thing users are clear about when they click through that prompt is that it means their Facebook friends' numbers will show up in their contact list.
Xuzz 15y ago
That makes no sense, the browser is sandboxed significantly more than any native app. Please stop assuming everything Facebook does is out to personally attack you or your data. It's demonstrably not the case.
- Bud 15y ago
  Uh, how is it "demonstrably not the case"? Seems to me that you're making a blanket statement, here, that is contradicted by most of the available facts. How about some support? Personally, I'd say you'd have to be an idiot to NOT assume that a large number of Facebook's actions are not intended to get more access to more kinds of user data. We've got about a half-decade of proof of this.
  - Xuzz 15y ago
    They just added very easy to understand privacy controls, for one. They're good enough that I'm considering merging my two "identities" into one Facebook account rather than my current two: I can now easily keep them separate. The other point is that it's impossible to prove the negative. Any action can find an interpretation that it's an assault on privacy — if that's the interperetation that helps make your point — but it's difficult if not impossible to prove there was no malicious intent by anyone related to Facebook. At least I, for one, find it hard to believe that Facebook really cares that much. But if you want to believe they are out to get you, I'm sure you can find and twist whatever you want to suit that opinion.
    - nodata 15y ago
      So... how does Facebook make money in your interpretation of things?
Me1000 15y ago
> However, the proliferation of native 3rd party apps meant that users weren't using the browser to get to Facebook and that may have led Facebook to finally decide to release the app. or it could just be that the Safari on the iPad doesn't let you upload photos to the largest photo sharing website out there (Facebook). I suspect the reason it took 18 months is because Facebook was waiting to figure out where the iPad fits into the ecosystem.
- megablast 15y ago
  I don't think your reason makes any sense. If it was true, where do you think they ended up with it? Facebook was deliberately dragging its heals for some reason, maybe partly due to not wanting to help Apple's platform anymore than they have to.
- rhizome 15y ago
  figure out where the iPad fits into the ecosystem Whaaa..? That doesn't make sense.
2arrs2ells 15y ago
You make good points, but won't the vast majority of iPad users be logged into Facebook both on the app and in Safari? I know on my iPhone (where I primarily use the FB app), I'm also logged in Safari (for FB connect, when sent FB links, using features not on app, etc).
jaxn 15y ago
I completely agree. I have been saying for a year that FB would never release an iPad app unless they had a deal with Apple to have the native app be able to set cookies in Safari. The good news is that I was wrong. I downloaded the app and promptly logged out of FB on Safari.
- xuki 15y ago
  Make sure you clear the cookie from facebook's domains too.
blakeross 15y ago
Hey - I'm a director of product at Facebook. The "main reason...the app is being launched more than 18 months after the iPad was first launched" is because we have a lot of things to do and few engineers to do them. We've got about one engineer per million Facebook users, and as Hacker News demonstrates time and again, those users have a lot of items on their wishlist. For instance, the bugginess and instability of our iPhone app has been a top user complaint for a long time. Turns out the set of skills required to improve an iPhone app is the same as required to build an iPad app. Something's gotta give. As for the "main reason why Facebook wanted users to use the browser instead of a native app," I've never heard that preference expressed at Facebook. Like the rest of you, we use iPads. And like the rest of you, we'd prefer a fast, sexy, native, custom-made experience to a website designed for your desktop monitor. Occam's razor, pure and simple. For a community that prides itself on rational debate, I'm consistently surprised at the level of discourse on certain issues here.
- Fliko 15y ago
  The point is that people value their privacy, and many tech companies don't.

by credo 15y ago

martingordon 15y ago

> Apple's app sandboxing and privacy protection means that 'Facebook for iPad' will not be able to mine as much user data as Facebook would like. Sandboxing does prevent developers from accessing files that don't belong to their apps but developers still have unfettered access to users' calendars and address book. Facebook has already been known to grab users' address books from the iPhone version of the app.

Xuzz 15y ago
Only after explicitly agreeing to share the information with a pretty explicit and huge warning message: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4001/4352706085_5a6e467b50.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4001/4352706085_5a6e467b50.jp... Seriously, I am getting tired of these outright lies or unsubstantiated rumors being perpetutated against Facebook.
- Bud 15y ago
  As if one obligatory click-thru obviates any responsibility for what Facebook does. Please. Don't make me laugh. BTW, on the way back to your cubicle at Facebook, wave hi to Zuck for me!
  - Xuzz 15y ago
    I do not work at Facebook or even know a single person who does. I've never even talked to someone — including on the Internet — who works for Facebook. Your personal attack was incredibly uncalled for. Just because I do not feel Facebook is evil does not mean that they are paying me to say so. (As to your actual point: yes, it actually does. The claim I was refuting is that Facebook "steals" contact information on your device. Well, in fact, it doesn't. It makes you confirm that you are okay with sharing this information with Facebook. What else could they do? The only other thing I could think of is Facebook not offering this feature. They are doing quite a good job here making it clear what happens to your information if you share it with them and you have to explicitly give your okay.)
    - potatolicious 15y ago
      > "What else could they do? The only other thing I could think of is Facebook not offering this feature." "Your friend [Bob Smith] wants to use Facebook Mobile Sync on his phone. This would allow Facebook to see any information he has in his address book relating to you. You can [learn more about Facebook Mobile Sync here]." > "They are doing quite a good job here making it clear what happens to your information if you share it with them and you have to explicitly give your okay." There are two issues with this: - There is a social contract (at least, in Western countries, I cannot speak for this as a universal rule) where your contact information is private. This is why people ask "is it ok if I give Bob your number?". Facebook violates this fundamental assumption by allowing Bob to unilaterally upload all this private data with a simple button push, without clearing it with anyone. - The fact that we had viral outrage when people's private numbers started showing up on accounts seems to suggest that they have not explained the use of this information sufficiently. If people are quite clear about what happens to this information, there would have been little cause for outrage. That prompt doesn't really make clear what information Facebook will roll into its databases, nor does it make clear in what way it is exposed. The only thing users are clear about when they click through that prompt is that it means their Facebook friends' numbers will show up in their contact list.

Xuzz 15y ago

That makes no sense, the browser is sandboxed significantly more than any native app. Please stop assuming everything Facebook does is out to personally attack you or your data. It's demonstrably not the case.

Bud 15y ago
Uh, how is it "demonstrably not the case"? Seems to me that you're making a blanket statement, here, that is contradicted by most of the available facts. How about some support? Personally, I'd say you'd have to be an idiot to NOT assume that a large number of Facebook's actions are not intended to get more access to more kinds of user data. We've got about a half-decade of proof of this.
- Xuzz 15y ago
  They just added very easy to understand privacy controls, for one. They're good enough that I'm considering merging my two "identities" into one Facebook account rather than my current two: I can now easily keep them separate. The other point is that it's impossible to prove the negative. Any action can find an interpretation that it's an assault on privacy — if that's the interperetation that helps make your point — but it's difficult if not impossible to prove there was no malicious intent by anyone related to Facebook. At least I, for one, find it hard to believe that Facebook really cares that much. But if you want to believe they are out to get you, I'm sure you can find and twist whatever you want to suit that opinion.
  - nodata 15y ago
    So... how does Facebook make money in your interpretation of things?

Me1000 15y ago

> However, the proliferation of native 3rd party apps meant that users weren't using the browser to get to Facebook and that may have led Facebook to finally decide to release the app. or it could just be that the Safari on the iPad doesn't let you upload photos to the largest photo sharing website out there (Facebook). I suspect the reason it took 18 months is because Facebook was waiting to figure out where the iPad fits into the ecosystem.

megablast 15y ago
I don't think your reason makes any sense. If it was true, where do you think they ended up with it? Facebook was deliberately dragging its heals for some reason, maybe partly due to not wanting to help Apple's platform anymore than they have to.
rhizome 15y ago
figure out where the iPad fits into the ecosystem Whaaa..? That doesn't make sense.

2arrs2ells 15y ago

You make good points, but won't the vast majority of iPad users be logged into Facebook both on the app and in Safari? I know on my iPhone (where I primarily use the FB app), I'm also logged in Safari (for FB connect, when sent FB links, using features not on app, etc).

jaxn 15y ago

I completely agree. I have been saying for a year that FB would never release an iPad app unless they had a deal with Apple to have the native app be able to set cookies in Safari. The good news is that I was wrong. I downloaded the app and promptly logged out of FB on Safari.

xuki 15y ago
Make sure you clear the cookie from facebook's domains too.

blakeross 15y ago

Hey - I'm a director of product at Facebook. The "main reason...the app is being launched more than 18 months after the iPad was first launched" is because we have a lot of things to do and few engineers to do them. We've got about one engineer per million Facebook users, and as Hacker News demonstrates time and again, those users have a lot of items on their wishlist. For instance, the bugginess and instability of our iPhone app has been a top user complaint for a long time. Turns out the set of skills required to improve an iPhone app is the same as required to build an iPad app. Something's gotta give. As for the "main reason why Facebook wanted users to use the browser instead of a native app," I've never heard that preference expressed at Facebook. Like the rest of you, we use iPads. And like the rest of you, we'd prefer a fast, sexy, native, custom-made experience to a website designed for your desktop monitor. Occam's razor, pure and simple. For a community that prides itself on rational debate, I'm consistently surprised at the level of discourse on certain issues here.

Fliko 15y ago
The point is that people value their privacy, and many tech companies don't.