About Those Facebook Privacy Settings…
0So, you’ve done it all right. You’ve meticulously chosen your Facebook privacy settings so that only your closest friends can see the most personal information about you. No one else has access. Or so you think.
Turns out, it’s more like your designated closest friends and anyone who advertises on Facebook. (And, P.S., anyone *can* advertise on Facebook. Doesn’t have to be a business.) Sure, advertisers aren’t given the exact identities of the individuals who are served their ads, but given the precise way that advertisers can choose their target audience — by some combination of location, age, interests, employer, etc. — anyone with a few cents to spend on an ad can undoubtedly unmask your most personal details if he/she wants to. In fact, Stanford Computer Science researcher Aleksandra Korolova has done just that. (Don’t worry — she targeted a friend whose personal information she already knew and did it in order to prove a point to Facebook.)
And even if you’re not worried about a stalker taking up advertising or an advertiser taking up stalking, there’s still reason for concern. Just ask the gay British teen whose parents reportedly threw him out of the house after seeing his Facebook homepage when he stepped away from the computer but left himself logged into Facebook. Knowing his parents’ homophobia, he had deliberately excluded any reference to his sexual orientation from his profile, but based on his online activities and relationships, he was served ads targeting gay men anyway. So, when his parents viewed his page, they saw the information he had posted as well as the gay content he had no control over. And threw him out of his own home. Perhaps the parents’ tragic anti-gay bias is more at fault than Facebook, and we certainly have a long way to go to create a world — and families — where all LGBT youth (who want to) can live openly and safely. (For more information on critically important work being done to decrease family rejection and increase support for LGBT youth, check out the Family Acceptance Project.)
In the meantime, Facebook shouldn’t exacerbate the problem and should only target ads based on information in individuals’ public profiles. If you agree, tell Facebook to make that change, and until they do, you may want to be extra careful about logging out of your account on shared computers and being cognizant of who’s looking over your shoulder when you’re online.
Learn more about digital privacy: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Facebook: Making Your Political Opinions Less Private Since 2012
0Facebook announced yesterday that “every post and comment — both public and private — by a U.S. user that mentions a presidential candidate’s name will be fed through a sentiment analysis tool that spits out anonymized measures of the general U.S. Facebook population.” This analysis, along with reader polls and other information, will in turn be shared with politico.com.
The brief announcement of this new feature raises serious questions and offers few answers. Most troubling is Facebook’s willingness to search and collect users’ private political preferences and thoughts, preferences they may have shared only with their closest friend in a private email.
This raises at least three concerns. The first is that many users may not want to be part of any “sentiment analysis” or poll. For example, they may be a firm supporter of Mitt Romney but find Ron Paul’s ideas interesting. Are they now going to feel hesitant to talk about Paul’s ideas out of awareness that it might be registered as support or boost a candidate they don’t like? Second, we don’t see any mention of user consent anywhere in Facebook’s announcement. How has Facebook decided that users agreed that their personal communications can and should be used in this way?
Finally, what other uses might this information be put to in the future? Will it be used to serve users ads from politicians or manipulate voting preferences in some way? We can see the marketing materials from Facebook now: “Candidates, serve ads to secret supporters! No one knows about their preferences except their closest friends and us.”
Worse, what if this secret knowledge is used to shape messages? Users would likely not expect they are getting a Romney ad that highlights libertarianism because in the past they said something positive about Ron Paul in an email.
We place a premium on political speech in the United States and debating candidates’ positions and merits. Because Facebook has become one of the central forums for political debate it has a duty to clearly disclose any practices that threaten to distort that discussion. It can begin by bringing transparency to this process and answering some basic questions – beginning with how it justifies including users’ private communications.
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Civil Liberties in the Digital Age: Weekly Highlights (1/6/2012)
0In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
Facebook Ramnit Worm Swipes 45,000 Usernames, Passwords [Huffington Post]
“Facebook users have a new threat to look out for. It’s called the ‘Ramnit’ worm, and it has compromised 45,000 user accounts.”
WikiLeaks Supporters Lose Court Bid to Protect Twitter Records [Wired]
“Three WikiLeaks supporters have lost their bid to protect their Twitter records from U.S. investigators trying to prosecute the whistleblowing site over its publication of secret and sensitive government documents.”
OPINION: Internet Access Is Not a Human Right [New York Times]
“There is a high bar for something to be considered a human right. Loosely put, it must be among the things we as humans need in order to lead healthy, meaningful lives, like freedom from torture or freedom of conscience.”
Gartner: Next, Social Networks Will Sell Insurance, Become Banks [ReadWriteWeb]
“A recently published business development analysis by research firm Gartner looked into social networks’ need for a more structurally sound revenue stream, and came to the conclusion that to maintain viability and competitiveness, they will soon enter the financial services industry.”
A New Year for Privacy: The PRC Launches Online Complaint Center [PrivacyRights.org]
“The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC) is proud to announce the launch of an interactive online complaint center designed to serve as a clearinghouse for consumer privacy complaints.”
2011 in Review: Four Cases That Promoted Transparency in 2011 [EFF]
“2011 was an important year for court decisions interpreting the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).”
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Civil Liberties in the Digital Age: Weekly Highlights (12/2/2011)
0In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
Kindle Fire Draws Privacy Slam From Congressman [Information Week]
“A senior Congressman said Amazon is dodging questions about how it’s using what he called a ‘massive’ trove of information collected from Kindle Fire users.”
Facebook Is Abiding By Its Own Rules, Great! Now How About Good Rules For Everybody? [ACLU Blog of Rights]
Today, Facebook agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it deceived customers by failing to uphold privacy promises.
App sends user GPS data to ad firm [Daily Yomiuri]
“A smartphone application that gathers information on the location of its users was downloaded by more than 1.5 million people, and the data was sent to an advertising company in the United States, according to experts.”
The Department Of Homeland Security Wants All The Information It Has On You Accessible From One Place [Forbes]
“Now the Department of Homeland Security wants to create its own internal fusion center so that its many agencies can aggregate the data they have and make it searchable from a central location.”
Facebook faces a crackdown on selling users’ secrets to advertisers [Telegraph]
“The European Commission is planning to stop the way the website ‘eavesdrops’ on its users to gather information about their political opinions, sexuality, religious beliefs – and even their whereabouts.”
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
The Facebook/FTC Settlement Proposal: What’s New, What’s Not
0Earlier this week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed settlement with Facebook, addressing its assertion that Facebook deceived users by failing to uphold its privacy promises. As we said elsewhere, the proposed settlement has one major step forward: it prohibits the company from “begging forgiveness instead of asking permission” by changing its privacy settings to make data more public or share it with more people. But it doesn’t cure all of the outstanding issues with Facebook privacy.
Here’s a quick rundown of the plusses, a minus and outstanding questions of the proposed settlement. (You can read the whole thing here.)
Plusses:
- Asking Permission, Not Begging Forgiveness. No more Beacon fiascos; no more “privacy transitions” that make more information public. Facebook must now obtain a user’s express consent before taking any information previously covered by a privacy setting and making it more public than it was before, and it promises not to “misrepresent in any matter, expressly or by implication,” its privacy protections for names, photos, location history, and other information.
- What’s Gone Is Really Gone. Once you delete a photo from Facebook, Facebook will ensure that no one else can access it within 30 days. (It still can’t help if your friend copied the photo and reposted it on Facebook or elsewhere, however.)
- Comprehensive Privacy Program. Facebook is required under the proposed settlement to establish a “comprehensive privacy program” that will protect the privacy of identifiers, photos, and location information in both new and existing products. Facebook has already announced that it will be appointing two new privacy officers in response to the proposed settlement.
A Minus:
- The App Gap Remains. Although Facebook has promised to be clear about how information will be shared with third parties going forward, the proposed settlement does not fix existing problems such as the “app gap” and Instant Personalization.
Questions:
- Still Out of Control? The proposed settlement makes it very clear that Facebook must ask permission before increasing its sharing of information that currently has a privacy setting, but it does not explicitly put the same requirement on information that currently has no privacy setting at all (including information like your name and profile picture that used to have such controls). This is particularly important as the company continues to collect information about its users activities outside of Facebook itself, such as its log of every visitors to Web pages that include a Like button.
- Privacy by Default? The settlement agreement also doesn’t explicitly address how Facebook will deal with new kinds of information from future products, since that information is also not covered by an existing privacy setting.
- The FTC’s Future Role? The FTC is empowered to ensure that Facebook complies with the settlement, and Facebook has made a broad promise not to "misrepresent" its privacy protections in the future. But it’s not entirely clear whether the FTC would use this authority to challenge new Facebook products or services that aren’t dealing with information currently covered by a privacy setting.
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Facebook Is Abiding By Its Own Rules, Great! Now How About Good Rules For Everybody?
0Today, Facebook agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it deceived customers by failing to uphold privacy promises. The FTC announced today that the social networking site “deceived consumers by telling them they could keep their information on Facebook private, and then repeatedly allowing it to be shared and made public. The proposed settlement requires Facebook to take several steps to make sure it lives up to its promises in the future, including giving consumers clear and prominent notice and obtaining consumers’ express consent before their information is shared beyond the privacy settings they have established.”
This settlement with Facebook is an important step, making it clear that companies can’t simply change the rules without asking users’ permission. We shouldn’t have to struggle with complicated and constantly shifting privacy settings just to keep control of our own personal information. To keep pace with new technology, we also need new laws and tools like “Do Not Track” and comprehensive privacy legislation to help us safeguard our own personal information.
Facebook has a long history of innovation — but that history includes repeated attempts to rewrite its privacy policies and allow more data to be shared by default or without notice. We’ve spent a lot of time raising awareness of the “app gap” (including submitting comments to the FTC) and how Facebook shares information with third party applications, so we were glad to see that explicitly called out in the FTC’s settlement notice. But other examples abound, from Facebook’s ill-fated Beacon that automatically shared user’s purchases on other Web sites with their Facebook friends to its proposed changes to its Terms of Service that would have allowed it to retain photos and other content even after a user deleted them to its ”privacy transition” that made more information unalterably public. Facebook users have repeatedly been surprised to learn that their information was being shared with other Facebook users, “Instant Personalization” partners, third party app developers, advertisers, and even anyone on the Internet in ways they didn’t expect.
As hard as it is for users to understand one set of privacy controls on Facebook, it’s even harder when those controls keep changing. That’s why we’re happy that the FTC has stepped in and put an end to Facebook’s practice of “begging forgiveness rather than asking permission” when it comes to your personal information. Today’s settlement requires Facebook to obtain a user’s express consent before sharing any information that would not have been shared under the user’s prior privacy settings. That’s definitely a step in the right direction.
We also need more tools from Facebook like its Profile Review and inline privacy controls that help users understand and control how their personal information is being shared. And we need to keep working on updating laws like the antiquated Electronic Communications Privacy Act and passing comprehensive privacy legislation to make it possible for all of us to properly safeguard our personal information.
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Like Privacy? There’s An App For That!
0It’s 2011 and my whole family is more plugged in than ever. My mom picks me up at the airport and we use her GPS to drive to the house that my family has rented for a Thanksgiving-week family reunion. Along the way, my brother uses his iPhone to check up on football scores and see how he’s doing in his fantasy league. I use my BlackBerry to post a late-breaking update to the ACLU’s Twitter feed, and also to check-in on my personal Foursquare and post an update to Facebook. When we get there, my aunt puts aside what she’s been reading on her Kindle while she waits for us to arrive. Later that night, my cousin pulls up movie trailers on her iPad, so we can decide what we’ll go see later in the week.
This kind of instant and constant electronic access is such an everyday phenomenon to so many of us that we don’t think about what personal information we’re exposing simply by using these technologies. Sure, we’re all well aware of the dangers of posting pictures from weekend escapades or snarky comments about your boss to your Facebook page, but what about the information being collected by Facebook as you surf the Internet? Or by your cell phone as you travel? Or by your GPS device as over the river and through the woods to Grandmother’s house you go?
Today we’ve launched a Facebook app that assesses your privacy exposure based on your online habits and technology use. Don’t worry, we also provide some information on steps you can take to protect yourself and your personal information.
If you’re thinking, “I have nothing to hide – if I don’t want everyone to see it, I don’t post it on Facebook,” think again. The things that we “like” and the other entities that we’re affiliated with online reveal a lot about who we are. Take the example of a gay Stanford student who wasn’t out to family and friends back home in his small, conservative community in the South, but wanted to “like” an LGBT campus group that he was a part of on Facebook. We shouldn’t have to choose between being on Facebook and keeping control of personal information (in this case, his sexual orientation).
You can also use the app to share this information with your friends and the people you love. What better gift to give at holiday time than the gift of knowledge? Check out the new app on our Facebook page!
Learn more about privacy: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Civil Liberties in the Digital Age: Weekly Highlights (11/18/2011)
0In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
Judge to Feds: To Track Cell Phones, Get a Warrant [ACLU Blog of Rights]
In a victory for the privacy rights of everyone with a cell phone, a court has held that law enforcement agents must get a warrant to access cell phone location records.
Judge Declares Law Governing Warrantless Cellphone Tracking Unconstitutional [Wall Street Journal]
“In a succinct one-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Lynn N. Hughes of the Southern District of Texas declared that the law authorizing the government to obtain cellphone records without a search warrant was unconstitutional.”
Verizon Wireless Will Watch Everything You Do If You Don’t Opt Out [Consumerist]
“Verizon Wireless is sending emails to customers this week informing them that the company will now begin storing their browsing history, location, app usage data and more, in the name of providing ‘more relevant’ mobile ads.”
The Social Network is Stalking You [ACLU Blog of Rights]
A new web feature by USA Today details the ways that Facebook stalks you around the Internet – even when you’re not logged in.
Google now allows you to opt out of Wi-Fi location database, but it’s not pretty [The Next Web]
“Google has announced a way for owners of wireless networks to opt out of being indexed by its location database by appending ‘_nomap’ to their network’s name (SSID)…”
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
It Was Close, But We Won: Viva Net Neutrality!
0Today in the Senate there was a major win for freedom of speech and the Internet. In a largely partisan vote Senate Democrats defeated a resolution introduced by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) which would have overturned the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) open Internet rules that are set to go into effect this month.
Though the FCC’s rules are not great, they do offer some protections for net neutrality on the wired Internet and overturning them would have been a huge setback for free speech on the web. During debate on the Senate floor yesterday supporters of the resolution railed against government regulation while opponents defended the rules saying they were necessary to maintain the openness and innovation that has allowed the Internet to thrive.
Those who supported the resolution repeatedly and falsely claimed that net neutrality represents a heavy-handed government takeover of the Internet that would quell innovation. The opposite is true. Fortunately, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Jay Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) were there to set the record straight.
The senators explained that the FCC’s rules only formalize the open Internet principles that have guided the Internet to date and ensured the level playing field that has allowed small businesses to meaningful compete with large corporations. This principle is what has allowed small start-ups like YouTube, Facebook, and Flckr to become the kind of massive success stories that revive the American dream. As Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) pointed out, if Google or other online video sites would have been able to pay off Verizon or Comcast to slow or even block traffic to YouTube they never would have had a chance.
Sens. Franken and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) spoke on the floor about the critical free speech issues involved in this debate. Franken said he believed net neutrality to be the “free speech issue of our time” as the Internet has become the soap box of the 21st century. He explained that protestors are no longer using poster board to display their messages but instead they are posting to Twitter and Facebook to communicate and organize. Udall highlighted the vital role an open Internet played in the Arab Spring. He challenge opponents of net neutrality by asking what message America would be sending the rest of the world if it removed regulations put in place to guarantee free speech and open access online.
As opponents of this resolution explained on the floor yesterday, the Internet has thrived under basic net neutrality rules. They successfully argued that by denying the FCC’s ability to cement these commons sense rules, a handful of corporations controlling access to the Internet and having both the technical means and the financial incentives to interfere with the free flow of information would do so.
We would like to thank our champions of free speech for standing up to defend the FCC’s rules on the floor yesterday and protecting our First Amendment rights online.
Learn more about net neutrality: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Civil Liberties in the Digital Age: Weekly Highlights (10/21/2011)
0In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
Google, Facebook go retro in push to update 1986 privacy law [cnet]
"For a few hours on Capitol Hill yesterday evening, it was October 1986 again, complete with legwarmers, an Apple IIc, pop rocks, Duran Duran, and cell phones the size of a cat."
Twitter chief: We will protect our users from Government [Telegraph]
"Costolo referred …about the need to ensure Twitter remains a platform upon which freedom of speech is prioritised, even during times of civil unrest."
ECPA: Online Privacy Stuck in the ’80s [ACLU Blog of Rights]
This week, our federal online privacy law turns 25. The ACLU is hosting a blog series that will address some of the many reasons why the "Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986" (ECPA) is in need of an upgrade!
TAKE ACTION: Ask Congress for a privacy upgrade today!
Mobile Marketing Association Releases New Privacy Policy Guidelines for Mobile Apps for Public Comment [Market Watch]
"… the release of the MMA Mobile Application Privacy Policy, the first guidelines document of its kind that addresses the core privacy issues and data processes of many mobile applications, for public comment."
See also: PrivacyChoice Challenges Developers To "Get Their Apps in Gear"
Majority of Consumers See No Benefit in Sharing Personal Data [Hospitality Technology]
"Seventy-four percent of American and Canadian consumers said they don’t feel they’re receiving a benefit from sharing personal information with marketers, according to the latest survey research from LoyaltyOne."
Learn more about dotRights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.