Facebook Admits To Tracking Users, Non-Users Off-Site (theguardian.com) 147
Facebook said in a blog post yesterday that they tracked users and non-users across websites and apps for three main reasons: providing services directly, securing the company's own site, and "improving our products and services." The statement comes as the company faces a U.S. lawsuit over a controversial facial recognition feature launched in 2011. The Guardian reports: "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. This is because other apps and sites don't know who is using Facebook," Facebook's product management director, David Baser, wrote. "Whether it's information from apps and websites, or information you share with other people on Facebook, we want to put you in control -- and be transparent about what information Facebook has and how it is used."
But the company's transparency has still not extended to telling non-users what it knows about them -- an issue Zuckerberg also faced questions over from Congress. Asked by Texas representative Gene Green whether all information Facebook holds about a user is in the file the company offers as part of its "download your data" feature, Zuckerberg had responded he believed that to be the case. Privacy campaigner Paul-Olivier Dehaye disagreed, noting that, even as a Facebook user, he had been unable to access personal data collected through the company's off-site tracking systems. Following an official subject access request under EU law, he told MPs last month, Facebook had responded that it was unable to provide the information.
But the company's transparency has still not extended to telling non-users what it knows about them -- an issue Zuckerberg also faced questions over from Congress. Asked by Texas representative Gene Green whether all information Facebook holds about a user is in the file the company offers as part of its "download your data" feature, Zuckerberg had responded he believed that to be the case. Privacy campaigner Paul-Olivier Dehaye disagreed, noting that, even as a Facebook user, he had been unable to access personal data collected through the company's off-site tracking systems. Following an official subject access request under EU law, he told MPs last month, Facebook had responded that it was unable to provide the information.
Facebook Tracks (Score:2)
No wonder it costs so much to save the Zuck's face (Score:1, Informative)
After this news spreads he'll have to spend way more than 7 mill to protect that pasty pudgy face.
http://disinfo.com/2018/04/it-takes-over-7-million-dollars-a-year-to-keep-people-from-punching-mark-zuckerberg/
Re: (Score:2)
This is a logical fallacy. The key to the fallacy is the word Americans. It indicates that all Americans that disagree view themselves as non-leftists.
Obviously this is identity politics calling itself out. There are some americans that disagree with some people and they call those that they disagree with right wing and white supremacist and racist.
There are racists and supremacist people on both sides. There are women that think they are the superior gender. There are blacks that think they are a supe
Re: (Score:1)
I think you mean Emperor Trump. "Comrades" are lefties, David Brock.
Re: No wonder it costs so much to save the Zuck's (Score:5, Funny)
I, for one, prefer "His Imperial and Royal Majesty Donald I, By the Grace of God and the Constitutions of the Empire, Emperor of the Americans, King of Canada, Mediator of the Mexican Confederation, Protector of the Confederation of Panama, Co-Prince of Cuba."
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I thought Reagan would make a fine king, although I was dubious about "Ronald I". You left out "Defender of the Seas" or some such phrase, BTW. Any king of the US past, say, 1890, needs something like that in his title.
Re: No wonder it costs so much to save the Zuck's (Score:2)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
I don't remember... (Score:1)
I don't remember clicking that authorize cookies thing for Facebook. But I do just click yes to them all since the internet can function without cookies.
Re: (Score:1)
I just enable cookies by default. More tracking means more relevant advertising, and better news link recommendations. The more Facebook and Google know about my preferences, the better.
If I don't want to be tracked, I just open an Incognito window. Incognito also works well for reading "First-3-Free" news websites, such as WaPo and the NY Times.
Re: (Score:1)
You seem pretty proud of the being a big part of the problem...
Re: I don't remember... (Score:1)
What kind of person -wants- to be shown advertising at all, much less targeted?
Re: (Score:1)
What kind of person -wants- to be shown advertising at all, much less targeted?
You are going to see advertising whether you want it or not. I run an adblocker, but some ads slip through, and I don't run it on all sites. So, since I am going to see the ads anyway, I prefer them to be relevant.
Now let's turn it around: What is the downside to being tracked? I don't see any.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
However, the issue is that most people don't know how or when to disable tracking.
Nearly everyone I know understands what Incognito mode is, and they understand that they should use it when searching for porn, or communicating with their KGB case officers.
Incognito mode doesn't guarantee that you won't be tracked, but I have never seen an ad that appears to be related to my Incognito browsing.
Re: I don't remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Facebook and friends are collecting far too much data on you, more than enough to impersonate your identity.
Even if we assume that every single employee of Facebook, and all its data partners, are beyond reproach and would never stoop so low as to impersonate you to defraud government welfare, banks, or online shopping (given their CEO was alleged to have stolen Facebook in the first place, what do you think the chances of that are?)... eventually all that data is going to be involved in a breach and become available to all and sundry black hats.
Re: (Score:3)
Do I have to take over your life or is it proof enough if I just destroy the one you have now?
Re: (Score:2)
Do I have to take over your life or is it proof enough if I just destroy the one you have now?
My tracking data gives you the ability to do neither.
If you have a list of websites that I have visited, how are you going to use it to "destroy my life"?
Re: (Score:2)
What does your tracking data give me? Your hobbies, your interests, maybe your position on certain topics or even your political view, along with your possible religious faith (if any).
First of all, find out more about the webpages you visit. Any boards among them? Then it's time to find out who you are. Read your posts. Get an idea where you stand on various things.
After that's done, or while doing this, send the raw information to your wife/husband/lover/whatever, boss, your coworkers, your friends and so
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not going to speak for ShanghaiBill, but anybody who searches through my Slashdot history will know most of my hobbies, a lot of my interests, my politics and positions on specific issues, and my vagueness on religion (I think I've mentioned that I'm "None of the above" for most lists). I've mentioned the city I live in, and if you assume that "david_thornley" means "David Thornley", I'll tell you up front that you will find one person of that name in that city, whose address and phone number is readi
Re: I don't remember... (Score:2)
There is no downside. Big Brother loves us all.
Re: (Score:2)
Ignoring the danger of advertising delivered malware, the risk from being tracked is that it is used to screw you over.
They know you are interested in a new widget. They know you have seen it advertised for âX. So now they know that you want it, and what you think the going rate is for it, and approximately where you live thanks to your geolocated IP address and closest CDN server, and can tailor their "offers" to you.
If you come along with no tracking info, they have much less information to screw you
Re: (Score:2)
Ignoring the danger of advertising delivered malware
What does that have to do with tracking? I see WAY more misbehaving ads when I am in Incognito mode, so tracking appears to reduce malware.
They know you are interested in a new widget. They know you have seen it advertised for âX. So now they know that you want it, and what you think the going rate is for it
They also know that I didn't buy at that price, so they have an incentive to offer me a better deal.
Re: (Score:3)
The downside of being tracked is that laws change. What's legal today needn't be legal tomorrow. Did you stop that activity that used to be legal but is illegal now?
Then there's that pesky data breach thing. You know, when companies that collect every minute of your day "lose" data which shows up in inconvenient places. Does your boss know you're reading those newspapers that don't agree with his political views? Probably not, but here's the guy that you pissed off because you didn't drink the coolaid and d
Re: (Score:2)
That's like saying that despite good locks and alarm, someone might still break in, so I'll leave the front door open with a sign saying "free stuff inside".
Your analogy makes no sense. What do the "locks and alarm" represent? What is the "break in"? Is that supposed to be a metaphor for the tracking? If so, that is not a threat, but something they are already doing openly. What is the "free stuff"? Is that a metaphor for my browsing history? If so, then you are just making a circular argument: Giving away my browsing history is bad because it may result in disclosure of my browsing history. Huh?
Re: (Score:2)
Used to be I could rely on NoScript to protect me on the web. I'd look at the list of sites trying to serve me Javascript, and allow the few that were relevant to what I actually want to do on the site. Nowadays, that JS relies on stuff they pull in from other sites with names that tell me nothing, so NoScript isn't that useful anymore. Whitelisting just isn't as useful as it used to be.
Combat it.. but yes FB is Big Data as a carrot.... (Score:1)
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-container/
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook is labeled as a life-essential service.
By whom??
There is a word for this ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
How about we start taking some personal responsibility for our own data, eh?
Right now, this entire situation exists because browsers give away tonnes of information to everyone and anyone who requests it as part of the web page. This isn't done on the server side, this is done right there in your browser, on your computer - so why aren't you putting basic stuff in place to stop it?
You close your curtains when you get undressed, right? You don't do that because peeping at you naked without your permission
Re: There is a word for this ... (Score:3)
How about we start telling personal responsibility for being physically stalked, too. Forget demanding that building security keep the stalkers out, or calling the cops. What you need to do is *wear a disguise* and put on a *silly walk*. Now THAT is the way to deal with a stalker!
Re: (Score:2)
Good. I hate them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Friends who take an image and tag every face?
Re: (Score:2)
e.g. I ran into the same weird distinction in Everquest. Sometimes griefer players would deliberately drag mobs onto people camping a popular spawn spot to get them killed. Because they were non-discriminatory in their griefing (i.e. they targeted everyone and anyone), Sony deemed their behavior fair play and refused to stop it. But if the players trying to camp the spawn fought b
Websites with a Facebook share icon... (Score:1)
Are watching you. Hmmm... What's that at the top of /.?
Re: Websites with a Facebook share icon... (Score:2)
Big Brother Facebook is always watching.
Re: (Score:2)
A plain link, using the image https://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/f... [fsdn.com] - fsdn.com seems to be a sourceforge domain. On this one thing /. comes out clean. No facebook tracking.
Re: (Score:2)
Interpretation (Score:5, Insightful)
and "improving our products and services."
Of course this primarily refers to the products and services they offer to advertisers.
Re: and they say we wear tin hats (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
smart people solve problems, when they want to (Score:3)
Facebook could have distributed a free "please track me everywhere" browser add-on that added some flag to the http session so that their users were identified as such.
With a bit of crypto, you could even make this so it didn't leak Facebook membership to third-party sites (for example, by providing an encryption key which Facebook can/cannot actually decrypt). Then everything gets sent to Facebook, but for the people who opt out, it's encrypted with a key associated with no known decryption key, and basically useless.
Also, I think Facebook has the resources to support more than one major browser.
This discrimination problem is a problem manufactured out of their own indolence, to their own convenience.
Re: (Score:1)
Opt out is part of the problem. Most of the shit show going on with the Internet right now should be OPT IN.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong. EVERYTHING needs to be opt-in. Hey, we're doing it for sex now, it's way less ridiculous on the internet...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True, but the demand for the double and triple opt-in that you're supposed to go through now is not only ridiculous, it also kinda kills the mood. And I mean for everyone involved.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trust is the opposite of demanding multiple questions of "may I?". When I trust someone, I trust them to know where to stop and to notice and act on the clues he gets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe people should stop screwing people they don't trust, I dare say that would solve this problem, and many others.
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook Cookie Tumbler is more what I'm after. You toss your cookie into a pool every couple of seconds and get another one that someone else used for a couple clicks.
Poison their data pool while you're at it.
Right up there in the "biggest lie" category... (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless that is Yiddish for: "I just want more money!", in which case - yeah.
Re: (Score:2)
That's disgusting. Can't we just shoot him with an artillery piece like they do in North Korea?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you the same guy that berated me for there not being assault rifles available in the US?
What matters is that you DO it, not what you do it with. Jeesh, people, focus!
Re: (Score:2)
Are you the same guy that berated me for there not being assault rifles available in the US?
No that wouln't be me. .223 or 7.62x39 rounds). Especially the complaints that they are only good for killing people or that they are weapons of war. For years I used a SKS for deer hunting (AK predecessor shoots the same round) and it is very e
While I am fairly pro gun, I'm not one of those crazies that thinks that everyone should own a full auto M14. That said I do disagree with a lot of the hysteria about intermediate powered semi-automatic rifles (think semi-auto AKs, ARs, SKSes or other guns that shoot
Re: (Score:2)
Would you be averse to a law making it illegal to carry a loaded weapon in a ready to fire state, outside of a narrow set of circumstances?
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing substantial and just fluff and filler?
Re: (Score:2)
Complicit (Score:1)
This has been known for years. FB was convicted multiple times for these practices in Europe.
What hardly ever comes up in the news or comments is that every website that puts FB-hosted 'like' buttons on their pages is complicit in all of this.
Note: all other social media buttons on webpages perform the same 'service'.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of (more reputable) pages around here have started something like a "double opt in" for Facebook, where you have to click on an icon of their page first to load the "like" button, so no data is sent to FB unless you explicitly want to.
Of course, that icon is as obnoxiously begging for "pleeeeeeeeeeease like us!!!" as it can... but it's a start.
Tracking of non-users violates GDPR (Score:4, Interesting)
I would say that tracking of non-users violates GDPR in several ways, hope Facebook has 4% of revenue at the ready to donate to the EU.
Time to boycott all sites allied with facebook (Score:2)
So we should just stop visiting all sites that support facebook login, (like slashdot) all companies that have a facebook page. That is the only way we can make sure facebook does not build a shadow profile of non users/
Call this lie (Score:3)
Wow such bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
They are saying that we non Facebook users are being tracked so they can provide us services that we don't use? They are saying that they are tracking non Facebook users to protect their security? All of us need to be tracked so they can be secure? Improving services by collecting data on users that don't use their site? They violate our privacy so that they can provide stuff to other users in order to make a profit?
LOCK ZUCKERBERG UP (Score:2)
Facebook == CANCER
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Careful what you wish for, it might come true. The last thing I'd want is more nanny state hand holding with government-approved content allowed only. If I wanted that I could've kept my TV.