Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Facebook has gone a long way to protect the privacy of users on its own site. But what happens when users share their Facebook profiles and friend lists with other sites? Are social networks responsible for defending data its members decide to take elsewhere? Those questions have taken on added urgency following the introduction of tools by leading social networks, including Facebook and News Corp.'s (NWS) MySpace, that let users interact with their friends on partner sites. Facebook Connect, for example, lets a user instantly share a movie rating on Netflix (NFLX) with all or some of his or her pals on Facebook. Privacy advocates warn that these services pose a whole new set of concerns about how user data are collected and shared among sites on the Web. Using these open-networking tools, thousands of companies can unearth a trove of new data about a visitor-age, gender, location, interests, and even what a person looks like. "I'm wondering if people really understand when they're using Facebook Connect that other sites get access to their whole user profile and social graph," says Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum. Announced last July, Facebook Connect has already signed up more than 8,000 partner sites, many of which plan to use data collected on Facebook members for their own purposes. Joost, a video-viewing site that integrated with Facebook Connect in December, checks the ages of viewers entered on their Facebook profiles to give its own content partners-CBS (CBS), for example-a better idea of which Joost users are watching CBS programming. Digg.com will let users display their Facebook profile photos alongside comments they make on the social news-sharing site.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has responded to the privacy concerns raised in this post by Consumerist. The post pointed out that a change Facebook made to its terms of service left the impression that the social network could keep and use copies of user content (e.g. photos, notes, and personal information) in perpetuity even if users removed the information and closed their accounts. "One of the questions about our new terms of use is whether Facebook can use this information forever," Zuckerberg wrote. But, oddly, he did not answer that question. Instead he opted for a rather roundabout explanation: if you send a friend a message via Facebook's e-mail system, Facebook must create mutliple copies of that message -- one for your "sent" message box and one for your friend's inbox. That way, if you leave Facebook, the copy your friend has would not be deleted. Fair enough. The implication is that, by extension, Facebook also keeps copies of all your other information, too. But the e-mail example has a major hole in it. Copying content makes sense for e-mails, where the medium itself depends on messages being copied. The thing is, Facebook users generally do not 'send' other types of content to one another, including photographs. Rather, they post them on their own profiles for others to stop by and see. There's no obvious reason that Facebook would need to perpetually store multiple copies of photographs -- because, as far as the user is concerned, they appear only in one place. Plus, Zuckerberg seems to underestimate his users' understanding of e-mail. My guess is most Facebook users don't think that if they close an e-mail account that all the e-mails they've ever sent will disappear. Frankly, it's not e-mails that are at issue here; it's this other, more personal category of content -- the stuff that people post within their own digital walls. Zuckerberg goes on to write that despite the presence of "overly formal and protective" language that Facebo

The latest phishing scam on Facebook has raised the question yet again as to whether the social networking site is dropping the ball on security measures and properly responding to privacy complaints. Facebook faced consumer fraud charges was investigated by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in 2007 for allegedly responding too slowly to user complaints about harassment, pornography, or nudity from the social networking site. As a result, Facebook agreed to settlement requirement requiring it to respond to such complaints within 24 hours. But in a recent string of phishing attacks in which hackers have broken into a user's Facebook account and hit up his or her friends for money with the online chat tool, pretending to be stranded or robbed, a complaint has emerged that the privacy team at Facebook hasn't responded to users in a timely manner. Mark Neely, a Sydney-based management consultant, became aware that his Facebook account was hacked when friends called him to see if he was all right - the hacker had contacted them via Facebook chat saying that Neely had been robbed at gunpoint in London and would need them to wire him money so he could return to Australia. Neely says he filled out two online complaint forms and e-mailed the privacy team at Facebook, but it took them more than 40 hours to respond to him. In the meantime, his friends continued to call him about being contacted by the hacker. Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt disputes Neely's figure, saying it only took 30 hours to respond. "In this case, we have restored access to the account to the rightful owner, are identifying the means by which the account was compromised (likely malware), and building in technical protections in the Facebook system to address this particular type of scheme," Schnitt said

Burger King, through their insanely creative advertising agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky (see their recent Burger King perfume launch), launches a Facebook application that encourages users to remove Facebook friends. Sacrifice ten of them and you got a free Whopper. 233,906 friends were removed by 82,771 people in less than a week. Facebook is overjoyed, right? What a great example to show the Madison Avenue agencies on how a big brand can get real engagement from users. This is the future of advertising. Or it could have been, if Facebook hadn't shut it down, citing privacy issues: We encourage creativity from developers and brands using Facebook Platform, but we also must ensure that applications follow users' expectations of privacy. This application facilitated activity that ran counter to user privacy by notifying people when a user removes a friend. We have reached out to the developer with suggested solutions. In the meantime, we are taking the necessary steps to assure the trust users have established on Facebook is maintained. Did anyone talk to the sales department before pulling the trigger on this? All that happened is the user being dissed got a message telling them, which helps the application spread virally. Without that feature the app is far less powerful. There is no real privacy issue here, just a policy decision by Facebook that people shouldn't be notified when you remove them as a friend. Facebook consistently tell users they can't do things in the name of privacy, despite the fact that those users know full well what they are up to. Unless investor and partner Microsoft makes them do it, of course.

"Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has just written an open letter to Facebook users regarding a privacy overhaul that is due to hit the site in the next few weeks. Soon, users will be able to selectively choose, on a per-post basis, who can see the content they post to the site. Facebook is also going to remove regional networks entirely, largely because some of those networks (like China) consist of millions of users, which makes them useless from a privacy standpoint. If these changes sound familiar, it's because Facebook actually announced them way back in July. Zuckerberg also notes that Facebook now has 350 million users ? it has added a whopping 50 million of them in the last two and a half months. Alongside the regional network change, privacy controls will be simplified. As Facebook rolls out the new privacy settings, users will be presented with a page designed to walk them through the new options. Depending on your current privacy level, Facebook will make recommendations, though you'll be able to change them as usual. "

Update on Feb. 18, 8:33 a.m.: Facebook is backing off changes to its terms of service, informing users on their official blog that they will remain intact. "Over the past couple of days, we received a lot of questions and comments about the changes and what they mean for people and their information," Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg writes in the blog. "Based on this feedback, we have decided to return to our previous terms of use while we resolve the issues that people have raised." To learn more, read our original post below. Facebook is having trouble dousing the flames in a firestorm over its trustworthiness. A recent change in its terms of use -- the legalese tacked onto the bottom of most websites -- has sparked concerns that the social networking giant plans to own all users' information forever. Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed in a blog post Monday that "on Facebook people own and control their information." But privacy advocates still aren't satisfied. "I think in simple terms it's a tug of war over user data," says Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington. "People put information on a Facebook page to share with friends. But it's pretty much with the understanding that they're deciding what to post and who has access to it. Facebook, like any other company, is trying to obtain maximum commercial value from its users."

"All Facebook users can deactivate their profiles, but doing so quietly might not make quite the same statement as using another service to slam the door on the site. One such service, Seppukoo.com, created by the Italian group Les Liens Invisibles, drew attention late last year after launching a campaign to convince people to commit Facebook suicide. Wannabe ex-Facebook members can provide Seppukoo.com with their names and passwords and Seppukoo then not only deactivates their profiles, but also creates a "memorial" page that it sends to users' former Facebook friends. Facebook evidently isn't happy about this development. Last month, the company fired off a cease-and-desist letter to Les Liens Invisibles, complaining that users who provide log-in data are violating Facebook's terms of service. The company also alleges that the scraping of its data violates a host of laws, including an anti-hacking law, the federal spam law and the copyright statute. "

FaceBook is sooooo concerned about our privacy!

Social networking phenomenon Facebook has beaten out arch-rival and former market leader MySpace by most measures of popularity, except the one that pays the bills. While Facebook has outpaced MySpace in bringing in members - it has 175 million active users at the latest count, compared with around 130 million for MySpace - it has struggled make money from them. While MySpace is closing in on $1 billion in revenues, Facebook generated less than $300 million in sales last year, reports say. Indeed, Facebook's efforts to drum up revenue have led to it repeatedly becoming the target of some of the biggest online privacy protests on the Web. Its most recent fight earlier this month followed Facebook's attempt to redefine its own rules and assert ownership over anything its members posted on the site. The company has since backed off and is rethinking its policies. Why hasn't Facebook benefited from the vaunted "network effect" that makes such services more valuable the more its adds members and connections between them? After all, Facebook is spreading quickly in nearly 100 languages, while MySpace has focused on the United States and five other markets where Web advertising flourishes. The answer may lie in the origins of the five-year-old site started by then Harvard University student Mark Zuckerberg. Its appeal at the outset was that it was a place where users could share tidbits of their personal lives with selected friends and acquaintances. This blurred the distinction between a private space and a public one. MySpace is more explicitly a public place where friends hang out in the equivalent of a cafe or a club and the aim is often to meet new people. Most of all, MySpace is a place to share music with other fans.

"Got an e-mail list of customers or readers and want to know more about each - such as their full name, friends, gender, age, interests, location, job and education level? Facebook has just the free feature you're looking for, thanks to its recent privacy changes. The hack, first publicized by blogger Max Klein, repurposes a Facebook feature that lets people find their friends on Facebook by scanning through e-mail addresses in their contact list. But as Klein points out, a marketer could take a list of 1,000 e-mail addresses, either legally or illegally collected - and upload those through a dummy account - which then lets the user see all the profiles created using those addresses. Given Facebook's ubiquity and most people's reliance on a single e-mail address, the harvest could be quite rich. Using a simple scraping tool, a marketer could then turn a list of e-mail addresses into a rich, full-fledged set of marketing profiles, with names, pictures, ages, locations, interests, photos, wall posts, affiliations and names of your friends, depending on how users have their profiles set. Run a few algorithms on that data and you can start to make inferences about race, income, sexual orientation and interests. While that information isn't available for all users, Facebook changed its privacy settings in early December so that certain information can't be made private, including one's name, current city, profile picture, gender, networks and friend list (the latter can be somewhat hidden from public view). Anyone with your e-mail address can harvest that information, the company admits."

Probably not limited to FaceBook

Facebook has been in the news a lot lately, and that's not good news for Chris Kelly, who is the chief privacy officer for Facebook, and - as we've reported - is quietly exploring a possible run for the Democratic nomination for state attorney general. Kelly was at the center of a firestorm this week regarding changes in Palo Alto-based Facebook's terms of service, which critics argued gave the social-networking site control over members' uploaded material, including photos, seemingly forever. On Wednesday, Kelly told CNN that the company will listen to complaints. The company's official blog now outlines how it has pulled back but Facebook has faced other problems that could hamper Kelly's efforts to run for a California political post. Last year, as Cnet reported, the firm reached an agreement with New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo after an investigation of complaints that Facebook hadn't addressed consumers' complaints of "harassment and inappropriate conduct" regarding underage members. Facebook officials have said they are cooperating with law enforcement to protect their users from predators. But with the Democratic AG race already looking crowded - with San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris and Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo in the mix, among others - Democratic consultants are watching with great interest. Poke this, friends: Could this be the juicy stuff of television ads in a Democratic law-and-order race in California?

Will monetary value increase the value of user's data on social networks?

Facebook and Twitter have helped make social networking a household word. Now they need to make money. Efforts to monetize the popular Internet services are increasingly a priority within the two companies, with Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter Co-founder Biz Stone outlining several initiatives at the Reuters Global Technology Summit in New York this week. And analysts and investors, in search of the next Google-like hit, are paying close attention to the breakneck speed at which Facebook and Twitter are adding new users. While the popularity of the two social media firms has yet to translate into the kind of revenue-generating machine that Google Inc developed with its search advertising business, some say Facebook and Twitter have become so central to the Internet experience that they are inherently valuable. "Both are new ways of communicating. And when you have a new way of communicating ... you benefit people enough so that there is going to be value there," said Tim Draper, managing director of venture capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson, noting that he regretted not having invested in either firm. In April, Twitter's website attracted 17 million unique visitors in the United States, up sharply from 9.3 million the month before. Facebook grew to 200 million active users in April, less than a year after hitting 100 million users.

"Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg told a live audience yesterday that if he were to create Facebook again today, user information would by default be public, not private as it was for years until the company changed dramatically in December. In a six-minute interview on stage with TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington, Zuckerberg spent 60 seconds talking about Facebook's privacy policies. His statements were of major importance for the world's largest social network - and his arguments in favor of an about-face on privacy deserve close scrutiny. Zuckerberg offered roughly 8 sentences in response to Arrington's question about where privacy was going on Facebook and around the web. The question was referencing the changes Facebook underwent last month. Your name, profile picture, gender, current city, networks, Friends List, and all the pages you subscribe to are now publicly available information on Facebook. This means everyone on the web can see it; it is searchable. I"

Zuckerberg should not be trusted with your personal data. The range of reader comments in response to this article are worth a read.

A Swiss insurance worker lost her job after surfing popular social network site Facebook while off sick, her employer said Friday. The woman said she could not work in front of a computer as she needed to lie in the dark but was then seen to be active on Facebook, which insurer Nationale Suisse said in a statement had destroyed its trust in the employee. "This abuse of trust, rather than the activity on Facebook, led to the ending of the work contract," it said. The unnamed woman told the 20 Minuten daily she had been surfing Facebook in bed on her iPhone and accused her employer of spying on her and other employees by sending a mysterious friend request which allows access to personal online activity. Nationale Suisse rejected the accusation of spying and said the employee's Facebook activity had been stumbled across by a colleague in November, before use of the social network site was blocked in the company.

Burger King's wildly popular Facebook application "Whopper Sacrifice," which rewards you with a free Whopper when you drop 10 friends, has been shut down. Social networking just got healthier. Last week, Burger King announced it was teaming up with social networking powerhouse Facebook for a special promotion: If you removed 10 people from your network of friends, the fast-food company would reward you with a coupon for a free Whopper. The story became an Internet sensation, but it's only now getting meatier. As it turns out, a notification feature on the "Whopper Sacrifice" application that lets your friends know they have been replaced by a shot at a free hamburger violates Facebook's privacy policy. "We encourage creativity from developers and companies using Facebook platform, but we also must ensure that applications follow users' expectations and privacy," the company said in a statement. "After extensive discussions with the developer, we've made some changes to the application's behavior to assure that users' expectations of privacy are maintained. The application remains active on Facebook."

Ah, social networking. It's become the fabric of today's Internet generation. Don't have a Twitter account? Heavens, even Sen. John McCain has a Twitter account. Signed up with Facebook? Only losers don't have a Facebook account. MySpace? Not bad, but it's so five minutes ago. But as lovely as social networking may be, there are a few problems. One of the biggest appears to be that you can kiss your privacy good-bye. Now, I'm not talking about the predilection of some people to share intimate details about themselves on social networking sites. I'm actually referring to the other things that might help contribute to your financial ruin. Those most enthusiastic about social networking are cybercriminals. They drool at the prospect of seeing the personal information of the 175 million people on Facebook. And they know how to use that information. For example, cybercrooks take great interest in the names of pets or grandparents on Facebook pages. That's the kind of information that banks and credit-card companies use to verify who you are when you bank online. "There are so many people on social-networking sites that it is becoming profitable for bad guys to go there," David Perry, global director of education at software security firm Trend Micro, recently told Agence France-Presse (AFP). "Bad guys can see all the things you post. You may be revealing personal information that is extremely valuable." Now Facebook has made revealing personal information even easier. This past week, it announced that users can change their privacy settings so everyone can see their profile. The company was actually responding to a request from many users who wanted the ability to share their information with even more people. As I said, cybercrooks are drooling.

In order to comply with Canadian privacy law, Facebook must take greater responsibility for the personal information in its care, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada said today in announcing the results of an investigation into the popular social networking site's privacy policies and practices. "It's clear that privacy issues are top of mind for Facebook, and yet we found serious privacy gaps in the way the site operates," says Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart. The investigation, prompted by a complaint from the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic, identified several areas where Facebook needs to better address privacy issues and bring its practices in line with Canadian privacy law. An overarching concern was that, although Facebook provides information about its privacy practices, it is often confusing or incomplete. For example, the "account settings" page describes how to deactivate accounts, but not how to delete them, which actually removes personal data from Facebook's servers. The Privacy Commissioner's report recommends more transparency, to ensure that the social networking site's nearly 12 million Canadian users have the information they need to make meaningful decisions about how widely they share personal information.

Facebook's developer platform has been used for a zillion marketing campaigns so far, but this one is actually dead-on hilarious. Fast-food chain Burger King has created "Whopper Sacrifice," a Facebook app that will give you a coupon for a free hamburger if you delete 10 people from your friends list. Burger King has put out some interesting campaigns as of late ("Whopper Virgin," "Subservient Chicken"), but this one piques our interest because of how gleefully it pokes fun at our social-networking obsessions. "Now is the time to put your fair-weather Web friendships to the test," the Whopper Sacrifice site explains. "Install Whopper Sacrifice on your Facebook profile, and we'll reward you with a free flame-broiled Whopper when you sacrifice ten of your friends. The funniest part: The "sacrifices" show up in your activity feed. So it'll say, for example, "Caroline sacrificed Josh Lowensohn for a free Whopper." Unfortunately, you can't delete your whole friends list and eat free (however unhealthily) for a week. The promotion is limited to one coupon per Facebook account. My Facebook friends had better appreciate the fact that I made a New Year's resolution to cut out red meat. Hint, hint.

"The Electronic Frontier Foundation said it sued the Justice Department and other U.S. agencies to get information about their policies for using social networks including Facebook and Twitter in investigations, data collection and surveillance. The civil rights group said in a complaint filed yesterday in federal court in San Francisco that the government has used social-networking sites in conducting investigations and hasn't clarified the scope of that use or whether there are any restrictions or oversight to prevent abuses. The EFF said in its complaint that it is seeking the information to "help inform Congress and the public about the effect of such uses and purposes on citizens' privacy rights and associated legal protections." It cited news articles that reported police searching Facebook photos for evidence of underage drinking and an FBI search of an individual's home after the person sent messages on Twitter during the G-20 Summit notifying protesters of police movements. Facebook, based in Palo Alto, California, is the world's largest social networking site with more than 300 million users who post photos, messages and other information on their own free Facebook pages. Twitter, based in San Francisco, is a free Web service with 58 million users that lets people send 140- character messages, called "tweets," to multiple followers. EFF, also based in San Francisco, filed Freedom of Information Act requests with federal agencies in October. None of the agencies had completed processing the requests by the applicable 20-day deadline, according to the complaint. The lawsuit seeks a court order for the government to process the requests and produce documents."

"Facebook tightens security as it deals with the continuing fallout over changes to its privacy settings." ...Earlier on May 13, Facebook had a meeting where employees asked executives questions about privacy. Facebook officials would not comment on exactly what was said. "We have an open culture and it should come as no surprise that we're providing a forum for employees to ask questions on a topic that has received a lot of outside interest," a spokesperson said.

Hey Zuck! Privacy & security are NOT the same thing. Misdirection is not the response FB users are seeking.

"Using Facebook and Facial Recognition to ID Random People : A professor at Carnegie Mellon conducted a study recently and found that about one third of people he took snapshots of on campus could be identified using Facebook and a facial-recognition technology recently bought by Google. Not only that, but 27% of those folks had information on their Facebook profiles - like birth date or birthplace - that enabled him to correctly predict the first five digits of their Social Security numbers (you know, the part of your Social Security number that's supposed to be totally secret)."