Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Caught Exposing Millions of Credentials

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the oh-yeah-sorry-bout-that dept.

Facebook 159

fysdt writes "Facebook has leaked photographs, profiles and other personal information for millions of its users because of a years-old bug that overrides individual privacy settings, researchers from Symantec said. The flaw, which the researchers estimate has affected hundreds of thousands of applications, exposed user access tokens to advertisers and others. The tokens serve as a spare set of keys that Facebook apps use to perform certain actions on behalf of the user, such as posting messages to a Facebook wall or sending RSVP replies to invitations. For years, many apps that rely on an older form of user authentication turned over these keys to third parties, giving them the ability to access information users specifically designated as off limits."

cancel ×

159 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

They're still operating ... (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087196)

... so isn't this kind of a 'well duh' moment?

Re:They're still operating ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087220)

Exactly. Does anyone using Facebook really expect to have any privacy left? If they do they are naive.

Re:They're still operating ... (2)

Kelbear (870538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087282)

More likely, they don't care.

The few that do expect privacy will see this, have a momentary sense of outrage, and then forget about it.

They'll continue to use facebook because they're really not all that concerned about their privacy. At most Facebook may make a statement about how they're continually improving security, and then it will be business as usual.

Re:They're still operating ... (4, Insightful)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087698)

I find this wrong (obviously), but at least in my personal case, I assume that everything I ever put on FB is there for the entire world to see, regardless of my own privacy settings.

I care about my privacy...I just don't see Facebook as even remotely "private"

Re:They're still operating ... (2)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087820)

Ha, if you post anything to Facebook that you wouldn't post on your old skool Geocities public website or whatever, then you fail the internets.

People look at Zuckerberg like he's some kind of freak that doesn't respect privacy. And he's looking back at a whole bunch of people complaining that the stuff that they posted on the internet... is out on the internet.

If you really want to share something secret, use hushmail or something. Facebook, OTOH, is all about syndication... letting your personal thoughts and habits reach as many people as possible... people who wouldn't have given a rat's ass about what you were saying or doing otherwise. If your information is reaching a wide audience, then you're WINNING :-D

Re:They're still operating ... (1)

molnarcs (675885) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087832)

So is this the sign that Facebook is turning into Myspace - gazillion of apps, horrible UI, and becoming a SPAM platform. And just finished my blog about why I ditched facebook a few hours ago: http://eyesbeyond.blogspot.com/2011/05/who-viewed-your-profile-on-facebook-and.html [blogspot.com]

Re:They're still operating ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087306)

It's called a social network... not to be confused with my secret little room, heheehe

Re:They're still operating ... (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087598)

Uh-huh - a social network. Much like a local area network. You'll have no objection if I browse my way through your local area network, will you?

Re:They're still operating ... (4, Funny)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087318)

I don't have any facebook apps installed. not a one.

I don't answer any surveys or take any polls.

I painstakingly go through every privacy setting and set to "friends only".

I post as little truly personal information as possible. No phone number, no address, no high school, college, or place of current employment, none of it.

and I'm still pretty sure that facebook has still somehow probably derived all of my info down to my underwear color, porn preferences, and whether I ate lucky charms for dinner last night, and sold that to advertisers.

Re:They're still operating ... (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087614)

Ditto. No apps, no invites, no surveys, I ignore those stupid "Someone answered a question about you" yada yada yada. Half my personal data is false, the other half misleading. And, I still don't really expect privacy. Like yourself, I'm sure Facebook has sold everything that's on my page, and knows who I am based on the people I know. Phhht.

Re:They're still operating ... (1)

sarysa (1089739) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087348)

Funny to see I'm not the only one who felt exhausted and in an "eff it, I give up" mood after reading the summary.

That said, unless this one gets picked up by the major networks, most users will remain unaware of it. Geeks like us, followed by news junkies, followed by everyone else (especially kids and adolescents) make up a scale from intense awareness to utter cluelessness re: Facebook's privacy practices.

Re:They're still operating ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087458)

That said, unless this one gets picked up by the major networks, most users will remain unaware of it.

I am happy to spread this news far and wide.

Re:They're still operating ... (3, Funny)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087556)

The other side of the basement is neither, and, let's face it, you aren't going to climb the stairs over this.

Re:They're still operating ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087994)

Yeah, but you are still using it.

Re:They're still operating ... (3, Insightful)

Broolucks (1978922) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087770)

Until people get bitten by personal information being leaked to the wrong people, they will not care about their privacy. If your private photos get leaked to your employer and there are allusions or consequences that embarrass you, you might get mad enough about it to stop using the service. If they get leaked to faceless corporations that will crunch the data to suck as much money as possible out of you and your friends with targeted advertising, the connection is fuzzy, remote, indirect, and it is unlikely you will care at all. For 99.99% of people, the lack of privacy will have no effect they can relate to their use of the service. The remainder might get into trouble, but 0.01% of users has no pull. And if the whole of society was to get into trouble because of things like this getting out of hand, the responsibility will be diluted among everyone - ergo, still, nobody cares.

In short, people care about their privacy versus the core of people they interact with or might interact with in the future. Outside of that core, their information might be distributed on flyers in the streets of Bangkok for all they care. At best they will be momentarily disturbed by the thought.

Dog Bites Man, News at Eleven. (5, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087362)

Somebody needs to take a refresher course in "What is this 'news" thing, anyway?" Something that happens with utter predictability and regularity, like a dog biting a man, is never really news. But if a man were to bite a dog, or Facebook was caught protecting user information, then that would be news.

Re:Dog Bites Man, News at Eleven. (1)

kvothe (2013374) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087474)

While what you say is true, there is still value in being reminded that such evils still exist in the world, rather than becoming bored and sweeping them under the rug.

Re:Dog Bites Man, News at Eleven. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36088234)

I bit your mum. Does that count?

Re:They're still operating ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087644)

I hope everyone down mods you for your sig alone. Uppity asshole.

Re:They're still operating ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36088040)

You mad bro?

Re:They're still operating ... (1)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088128)

Since you posted as AC the "Uppity asshole" portion came through as part of your post rather than your sig.

Thanks a lot Mark.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087200)

Are you sure you want to unfriend Mark Zuckerberg? (Yes/No)

Re:Thanks a lot Mark.... (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087818)

In Soviet Russia Mark Zuckerberg unfriends you!

Already Resolved? (1)

trunicated (1272370) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087206)

I was forced to log back into my Facebook account on my phone out of the blue last Friday. Perhaps that was them revoking access to all the old offline tokens?

Re:Already Resolved? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087300)

No. Were you forced to change you password as well? No, just relogin it sounds like. RTFA, requires password change.

Meh.. (1, Insightful)

cyberchondriac (456626) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087222)

FB is overrated anyway. And waay too many people use it as if it were their Twitter account.

Re:Meh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087242)

Oh please, Twitter is so 2009.

Re:Meh.. (1)

cyberchondriac (456626) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087388)

Yeah, but I don't really need my wall filled up with silly little things like "going to bed now" or "Off to the gym, cya all in a bit" or "Damn, I'm out of toilet paper!" or "OMG I just got gang-raped, someone please call 911".. it's just too much clutter.

Re:Meh.. (1)

phatphoton (2099888) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087426)

Then that might say something about your friends or your status filters....you do know you can block content from people who tend to abuse it...right?

Re:Meh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087566)

But if you block them entirely, how are you going to get the important stuff? Like the fact that they just got a hamburger and it was tasty but they spilled the drink in their lap!

Re:Meh.. (0)

x*yy*x (2058140) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088170)

I've ignored news from the people I find annoying and read from those who I find interesting. Works just fine.

Re:Meh.. (3, Funny)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087824)

I'd like to make a new service called Twatter. That way, when you send out a messages, your Twatting, and an individual message is a Twat.

Re:Meh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087364)

Not that I disagree, but tell me what is the "proper" way the use FaceBook?

Re:Meh.. (5, Funny)

rmstar (114746) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087440)

Not that I disagree, but tell me what is the "proper" way the use FaceBook?

The Zen way. You stand by instead of using it, and watch with compassion how the rest of humanity does something really stupid.

Re:Meh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087554)

I tend to watch with a maniacal laughter

Re:Meh.. (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087658)

"watch with compassion how the rest of humanity does something really stupid" because someday, you may need to do something really stupid!

Re:Meh.. (3, Insightful)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087728)

Treat it as if it is a giant billboard hovering above the earth that every single human being on the planet can see and read.

I use FB to keep up with a large number of poeple scattered around the globe that I gave a shit about. It is a casual way to be a part of the life of people I care about that I can't be close to.

I don't post pictures, play games, use apps, say stupid shit about my boss/employer, etc. People that do deserve to have their personal shit posted around the globe.

Re:Meh.. (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087830)

What are you, a rap video?

Re:Meh.. (1)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088146)

Not that I disagree, but tell me what is the "proper" way the use FaceBook?

Don't

Re:Meh.. (1, Flamebait)

Dr.Bob,DC (2076168) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087442)


I use Facebook to keep in touch with patients and other health care professionals (chiropractors, homeopaths, acupuncturists, etc.)

Dispensing health advice through it is quite nice but there's a lot of quackery there (vaccine pushers, big pharma, etc.)

It's great for what we use it for.

Re:Meh.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087522)

I use Facebook to keep in touch with patients and other health care professionals (chiropractors, homeopaths, acupuncturists, etc.)

Let me fix that for you ....

I use Facebook to keep in touch with patients and other quacks and dispensers of expensive placebos that have absolutely no scientific evidence to back their efficacy (chiropractors, homeopaths, acupuncturists, etc.)

There you go ....

Re:Meh.. (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087648)

Hey that homeopathic stuff is pretty cool. Guaranteed by them to have almost absolutely nothing in them.
To every only of those homeopathic con men I would love to sell some homeopathic gold.

Re:Meh.. (1)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087578)

*poke*

Is he a troll? I can't tell. He's so life-like.

Re:Meh.. (2)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087602)

You are trolling right?

Chiropractors, homeopaths, acupuncturists, etc are "health care professionals" while science is quackery "vaccine pushers, big pharma, etc".

Re:Meh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087822)

Alright Dr. Bob, DC (Whats the DC.. I thought Dr's used MD)

Anyways, if I were your patient and you placed medical advice for me in an open forum, then you would be in court.

Just a little FYI.

Chiropractors, homeopaths, acupuncturists.... ?!?! A lot of people might put those groups into that "Quack" list of yours.

Re:Meh.. (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087460)

Where are my mod points?!?

I have actually started deleting people who post a lot of stuff in a short amount of time. If you have to post every thought that passes through you're head I have no interest in knowing you.

Re:Meh.. (1)

phatphoton (2099888) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087482)

Lets use Incliq! or something like it. The only real way to ensure privacy is through a ssh/https tunnel to/from your friends' own servers...and with the $25 PC...all your friends having their own servers wouldn't be too nerdy....right?

Re:Meh.. (4, Funny)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087564)

FB is overrated anyway. And waay too many people use it as if it were their Twitter account.

The big downside to Facebook around here is that it requires friends.

Re:Meh.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087586)

FB is overrated anyway. And waay too many people use it as if it were their Twitter account.

The big downside to Facebook around here is that it requires friends.

You keep using that word, "friends", in the context of Facebook. I don't think it means what you think it means.

Re:Meh.. (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087660)

Actually it does mean what I think it means. The difference is that I have actual friends on my list instead of collecting confirmations like they're Pokemon.

Re:Meh.. (1)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087694)

FB is overrated anyway. And waay too many people use it as if it were their Twitter account.

Uh, FB as Twitter? My apologies, I was unaware that I was polishing that FB turd the wrong way. Should I polish it in the same counterclockwise direction that the Twitter software spells out in it's specifications, or is this location-dependent? I am north of the equator.

Translation: Facebook...Twitter...it's all the same shit

Facebook should be fined. (5, Interesting)

grahamsaa (1287732) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087234)

There should be a law requiring a fine for each user who's personal information is compromised as a result of bugs like this. My bet is that if there were, this type of thing would happen far less often. Of course, Facebook isn't the only company guilty of this type of thing -- and I suspect that until there is some serious consequence associated with this type of security hole, most companies won't take it seriously enough.

Re:Facebook should be fined. (2)

KhabaLox (1906148) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087368)

There should be a law requiring a fine for each user who's personal information is compromised as a result of bugs like this.

Well, that would kill the internet pretty quickly, so it would certainly solve the problem I suppose.

Re:Facebook should be fined. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087628)

There should be a law requiring a fine for each user who's personal information is compromised as a result of bugs like this.

Well, that would kill the internet pretty quickly, so it would certainly solve the problem I suppose.

The Internet did quite fine before all these instant billionaires prostituted personal data to make their billions. BILLIONS.

Many of us had websites that didn't have to prostitute personal data to stay around and we still don't - and we have our websites hosted in the snow - uphill - both ways!

If you have to prostitute personal data and do unethical things to make a profit, then maybe you should question your business model.

Microsoft doesn't have to prostitute personal data to make their BILLIONS which shows me that Internet businesses are more EVIL than Microsoft!

Suck it!

Re:Kill the Internet (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087656)

Watch out when Copyright Superclick comes into law. By that I mean the various forms of the laws that would make streaming/accessing/viewing anything not the authorized source into a crime.

I am floating the proposal that we make personal information just as prickly as copyrighted work. Then if Z had to pay $875,000 per shared profile times 20 million profiles he would wake up.

Re:Facebook should be fined. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087528)

There should be a law requiring a fine for each user who's personal information is compromised as a result of bugs like this.

You assume that this was a bug. From what has been seen of Zuckerberg's ethics, I'd say it's just about even money that this was a completely intentional feature to help get his advertising buddies all that juicy demographic info they pay him so well for.

Re:Facebook should be fined. (1)

rhizome (115711) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087536)

From what has been seen of Zuckerberg's ethics, I'd say it's just about even money that this was a completely intentional feature to help get his advertising buddies all that juicy demographic info they pay him so well for.

I think the OP's point was: "there should be a law."

However, the people most agitated by this are too busy reading Slashdot to make a phone call.

Re:Facebook should be fined. (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087750)

Yeah right. If they don't fine companies for exposing people's credit card numbers and SSNs, there's no way they're going to do it for exposing someone's DOB or address (which are generally public information to begin with).

Re:Facebook should be fined. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36088298)

Actually DOB and address are protected information in the context of HIPAA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_health_information [wikipedia.org]

Re:Facebook should be fined. (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087882)

if that where so - any company with half a brain would realize it would be cheaper to relocate to another country (that would love to have them)

Re:Facebook should be fined. (1)

vivin (671928) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088060)

That's a very good idea. Something like PCI requirements, but for personal information.

Re:Facebook should be fined. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36088082)

Facebook would take it in stride, and 99% of all small websites that collect relatively little and unimportant information just to operate with user accounts would shutter (or never go online). Diaspora would be DoA (if it isn't already), etc.

Only post online that which you could stand to have public. It's that simple people.

74 people like this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087236)

Are they still implementing it in PHP?

Don't put things up you care if people see/know. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087240)

It's really just that simple. Even better, don't be on Facebook at all.

Join the crowd (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087262)

Get thee to Congress and testify!

Re:Join the crowd (5, Funny)

TemperedAlchemist (2045966) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087448)

I thought we wanted to fix the problem.

This study was delayed (5, Funny)

drsmack1 (698392) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087268)

Researchers note that they would have released this study much sooner, but their PCs were hamstrung by Norton Internet Security.

Re:This study was delayed (1, Funny)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087640)

"Researchers note that they would have released this study much sooner" Well they should have just posted the study to their facebook profiles as a private note then.

Bound to happen (3, Interesting)

softWare3ngineer (2007302) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087278)

These types of errors are bound to keep happening. Software is to large to find and fix everything. Not saying that it is right, or developers should give up, or software should generally be more secure than it is. But maybe we as users should keep this in mind when we put anything up on the Internet. Especially when dealing with sites like facebook.

Re:Bound to happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087462)

The thing is, this isn't an error. This is all by design. Yes it's a bad design and they may not have fully thought out the consequences, but it's the design they intended.

Re:Bound to happen (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087666)

I bet you'd have no problem finding security flaws in Commodore 64's GEOS. Or KolibriOS. It's so frickin' small that it's humanly possible to scan every line of code for security holes.

Which is the key I think - software needs to be less bloated, so it's easier to debug.

Re:Bound to happen (3, Funny)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087938)

"Software is too large to find and fix everything."

That's what Sony said.

What if Zuckerberg wsa affected too? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087286)

What if Zuckerberg was affected too? Could we then say that he exposed himself?

News? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087290)

WHY do people continually seem surprised by these sorts of things? It's Facebook. This is their M.O. "Accidentally" leak millions of users' worth of data once every 6 months or so [wsj.com] , a handful of people (and all of Slashdot) wring their hands, and the millions of morons who don't care keep on using it without even noticing.

It's not a bug, it's a feature (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087296)

Working as intended

"Caught"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087314)

Maybe they should be fined, maybe this was grossly negligent, I'm not arguing that one way or the other.

But caught definitely implies the exposure of some deliberate action on their part. Neither the article nor the summary accuse them of anything like that, so what gives?

Re:"Caught"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087382)

Your point is fair but with Facebook's track record on user privacy, I don't have much good faith left to assume. "Instant personalization" anyone?

Did the attackers leave their name and address? (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087406)

No? must be anon, it was an impossible to thwart attack, the 13 year olds are to blame not facebook.

Use this thread (4, Funny)

Troy (3118) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087424)

to make a self-righteous post about how you don't use Facebook, and anyone who does is stupid.

Re:Use this thread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087638)

Use this thread to make a self-righteous post about people who don't use Facebook, so you can feel less stupid for continuing to use it.

But it won't work.

Re:Use this thread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087722)

I don't use Facebook, and anyone who does is stupid.

Re:Use this thread (1)

DeadlyMind (1865616) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088176)

I don't use Facebook, and anyone who does is stupid.

Re:Use this thread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087764)

Yo! That's my cue!

Re:Use this thread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087872)

I self-righteously don't use facebook, and anyone who does is stupid.

Anonymous Coward isn't safe either. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087576)

Your writing style will get you tracked. I remember when trolling a few years ago that someone guessed what ISP I was using.due to cross checks on multiple sites. If you are alive, your atoms will be tracked.

Re:Anonymous Coward isn't safe either. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36088050)

I knew I was right!! Years of stalking finally paid off.

Technology Makes Men Gods.. and Spycoders (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087748)

Is anyone surprised about this? Omniscience is more than just a fantasy now, isn't it?

Re:Technology Makes Men Gods.. and Spycoders (0)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087892)

Look, we all know that Mark Zuckerburg is an incubus. I mean, this was revealed in one of the extra scenes from the Ridley Scott cut of the Social Network, where Zuckerburg dances naked in his room eating blood, feces and strawberry sherbet before sodomizing his couch. The transformation is stunning, really quite well done, without the usual crap CGI we've come to expect from films like The Social Network (although I did think the scene where Sean Parker disembowels the President of France went far beyond the factual record), and accurately portrays Zuckerburg as the ghastly demonic privacy-raping ghoul he truly is.

Re:Technology Makes Men Gods.. and Spycoders (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088272)

He's worse than an incubus.

He's a fucking suit.

And he doesn't have nearly enough facial scars. Someone needs to get working on that.

Poisoning the well (3, Interesting)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087888)

I assume Facebook is being back-doored by the feds, assume they sell information to advertisers, so the only difference here is that it was unintentional. So I keep my FB profile loaded with inaccurate, out of date information. Just seems like the best way to hide a tree is in a forest of misleading information.

Re:Poisoning the well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36088118)

Or not use it. Why the hell would anyone want to use this? Because you want to be like everyone else?

Still not worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36087940)

I'm still not worried. I still haven't logged back into FaceBook after having tried it a few months ago. I know it's not for lack of trying; but FaceBook hasn't made itself essential.

Apple and FaceBook are both employing coupons to lure us in. This is their best shot. If they succeed, it become a "privacy tax" on those of us who don't participate. Participants step forward in terms of coupon savings. You effectively step back.

I don't derive any intrinsic pleasure from what the iPhone or FaceBook have to offer. Thus, I can simply "do the math" as a simple "what's my privacy and security worth" sort of equation. The SafeWay club card eventually got me on this. 30% off on some items that I actually need.

So there you go, Jobs and/or Zuckerberg. There really isn't that much I buy online. I buy clothing, the occasional Christmas gift. It's not a huge portion of my budget. My Honda might not be worth fixing in 10 years. If you can get me 30% off on a new one, I'll consider signing back in.

Privacy thoughts (1)

AnonymmousCoward (2026904) | more than 3 years ago | (#36087976)

You should have no reasonable expectation of privacy when posting ANYTHING to a social networking website.

Re:Privacy thoughts (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088010)

You should have no reasonable expectation of privacy when posting ANYTHING to a social networking website.

Absolutely right, Bob Walcott of 5098 Clay Street, Denver Colorado 80601, height 5 ft 8 weight 280 lbs, favorite soft drink coca-cola mixed with green koolaid, recently married until dinosaur pr0n collection discovered by wife.

Re:Privacy thoughts (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088030)

Link or it didn't happen...the Dino Pron, I could care less about Bob Walcott.

Re:Privacy thoughts (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088058)

So mixing Coca-cola and green koolaid is true?

Re:Privacy thoughts (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088044)

Of course you do, don't be daft.

Just bear in mind privacy is about relationships.

Hmmm... (0)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088070)

Am I the only one that read this as "Facebook Caught Exposing Itself"?

Facebook shocked, *shocked* at privacy breaches (5, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088214)

Facebook staff have been amazed to discover [newstechnica.com] that when Facebook passes users' complete details to application developers and advertisers like candy, some of the partner companies might accidentally let slip the information in some manner.

"We are appalled at this information leak," said Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg as he took a break from his personal RSS feed of drunk women's tits posted to his service. "But I can assure you that we have sternly suggested to everyone involved that they take somewhat greater care not to get caught, and maintain a serious demeanor when rolling around in the great big pit filled with money in their basement."

"I'm horrified and outraged," said office worker Brenda Busybody, 43 (IQ), "that stuff I put on the Internet is on the Internet. It violates everything I expect. I want privacy when I'm calling my boss a useless fuckstick to the entire world, all my coworkers and my boss himself. And when I'm playing a bit of FarmVille before we nick off down the pub."

Privacy advocates are working on Diaspora, a security-enhanced social network so far populated by Linux users who cryptographically sign every update about which episode of Babylon 5 they just finished watching alone in their parents' basement. "START PGP KEY BLOCK!" said open source software advocate Hiram Nerdboy, 17. "WE WILL PROTECT YOUR FREEDOMS!" The next version of Diaspora will allow users to list more than three friends, should there be any demand whatsoever for such a feature.

Facebook works on the now-standard "Web 2.0” business model: 1. Brutally sodomise the personal privacy of anyone who comes within a mile of your service and say "hey baby, I'm sorry" every time you're busted. 2. Sell ads.

facepalm (1)

PrimordialSoup (1065284) | more than 3 years ago | (#36088218)

how can I share this article on facebook ?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>