Sueballs flying over Facebook's Android app data slurping Facebook can add a class action lawsuit to the list of legal woes it faces over data misuse revelations. A complaint [PDF] filed in the social network's home district of Northern California accuses Facebook of violating both state and federal law when it logged and collected information from the Android version of its mobile …
The first of many I suspect. What is worse for FailBook is if these cases generate ongoing negative publicity about their antics. They rely more than Chocolate Factory on user acquiescence at a minimum to their data slurping ways as they need a critical mass of active users to be viable; MySpace anyone? While Chocolate Factory is vulnerable on the same grounds their services are more varied so they are less reliant on anyone service to the degree FailBook is.
The "millennials" are so tied up in "liking" and having to have "recognition" of their generally pointless lives that they will still flock to the cess pit that is facebook.
Like the proverbial *lemmings off a cliff, they will continue to sign up in droves.
Nothing will discourage them.
If not FB then some other "social meeja" waste of space.
It's only the sane, privacy respecting folks that can dump it with no consequences.
At the moment I have a great deal of conflict with FB, it has just allowed me (well, my mate) to locate and contact one of my birth parents in the space of a few days. The local council were still fumbling around in the dark after 9 months.
I suppose, occasionally, FB does have its uses but my privacy far outweighs them.
*I know lemming don't run off cliffs but its perceived wisdom, irrespective of its validity.
I find no need whatsoever for Twatter, Faceplant or Instaspam after trying them all briefly. I have no desire to know what random crap other people are doing every second of the day, or to be bombarded with offensive mass market "politically correct" opinions. The best solution is as always, don't feed the trolls...
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
"Connecting people" is the needed foundations to built the data slurp on - and make it effective.
They need to "connect people" to ensure more data keeps coming in, and to correlate those data, to increase their depth, and discover and exploit your weaknesses. Slurping your calls and SMS is another way to achieve it.
So FB is not a blatant liar when it says its "dream" is to connect people - just they don't say all the truth about why they need it - it's not to help you, it's to help its profit.
Not...
Which version of Android are we talking about here? I'm pretty sure from experience there is a massive "Accept" button when you install an app or use it with regards to permissions.
I'm also wondering how deep this rabbit hole goes, Google are as shifty as Facebook, if not shifty-er (is this a word? if not it should be) so where are we going here? How long before the most not-evil self certifying company on the planet is fingered for being, you know, "evil"?
Maybe they targeted both google+ users? I just don't know but it's about to get interesting.
You do realize that Facebook comes pre-installed on many Android devices, and that the "Accept button" on these is actually legalese buried in a click-through agreement on device start (or, worse, one of those probably-illegal shrinkwrap licenses)?
My phone never even had that much, and the app came pre-installed as a system service. Can't root this particular device either, best I could do was disable it. It's related services are not running, however, and I don't think they can on Android N or later once an app is disabled.
Even if it was preinstalled you would have to accept the runtime permission the first time you run it up.
It doesn't "install a system service", that is utter nonsense. The first time you run it up, it sets up a background task that runs in the app sandbox. You disable the app, you disable the background app service
It does on some devices - facebook get the device manufacturer to load a few apps in system/priv that run as system services from the time you first start your device, regardless as to whether you have signed into facebook or even have a fadcebook account.
Nope, there are multiple runtime accept buttons. One the first time it wants access to SMS, one for contacts and so on.
The guy is an idiot frankly. "Facebook wants permission to read SMS", accept, deny. Clicks accept, complains it can read SMS....
Will soon be parted. Assuming the Judge will be impartial enough to understand Facebook's scheme. And, no it doesn't make it any less slimy. But, to feign ignorance about how Facebook, and co. Work post 2012, when everyone, and their Mutt were barking along the lines of "You were the Product that's being sold!" Were falling on deaf ears.
Well I have very little sympathy in this case. Unless you can say that a Representative of Facebook came to you, and Heald a Gun to your Head, and said spill your Guts. It was your own choice to do so, so live with it.
Fine. Now try explaining all that to Average Joe, or worse your 60+ mother who just had a new phone for their birthday which came with FB pre-installed, ready to slurp all of your contacts. (Try getting them to uninstall an app.)
It's always easy to assume the moral high-ground when you know what you're talking about.
Well I have very little sympathy in this case. Unless you can say that a Representative of Facebook came to you, and Heald a Gun to your Head, and said spill your Guts. It was your own choice to do so, so live with it.
I expect part of what is at issue here is FB took on *more* access/permissions than it should have. Even though a user may have authorized permissions, there would be expectations on just how far those permissions would go, and FB went well beyond that.
Fortunately my "smart"phone is old enough to not have the FB app pre-installed (it had a few apps for services that don't even exist anymore). Would have disabled it if it *had* been there (don't need apps with digital-OCD thinking they have to query the internet every 5 minites).
I am curious, though; if you had a phone with a built-in FB app, but not configured for a user account, would it *still* collect and forward data?
How will the GDPR affect the use of older devices? Apps have to be changed to meet the new rules, so how about the OS, especially on older devices? Do a factory reset and you will need to agree to agreements that would not meet the new standards.
Then there is the OEM service SNS or Social Networking Synchronisation app which has been on all the branded phones that we looked at. Cyanogen based devices looked at did not appear to have this feature.
From what I understand, it is still included/used to slurp data via OEM servers by Social Media companies.
Years ago understand, as post-grad research project, we set up HTC Desire mobile and false FB account ID. The FB App was disabled and the device populated with generated data. The device was used to make calls to specific temporary numbers. After a while the data turned up in the FB account.
IIRC the names on the contacts list was populated with random real names taken from a chinese public phone directory with addresses altered. These then turned up as friend recommendations on the FB account a few weeks later.
Unfortunately, the Uni concerned buried our research in fear of big tech reprisal after we sought clarification from HTC/FB and got a very terse legal response.
As a previous AC stated, permission was found buried in the legal statement you have to agree to to use the device.
With the GDPR coming into use, it must surely render all these click through/shrink-wrap agreements mute/illegal. If you reset your device and are again faced with the agreement to use the device, are the OEMS now in breech? With SNS active, are the OEM'S actively acting without consent or consent obtained illegally?
FB and Twitter are both factory installed on many devices, I am told that even if disabled, the background services still run.
Roll on GDPR. Let's hope the test cases happen sooner than later.
Incidently, my cynical US based colleague postulated that in the incoming EU law is being treated as a payday bonanza by US politicians who will use the threat of rollout over there to extract more campaign funds.
"Apps have to be changed to meet the new rules, so how about the OS, especially on older devices? Do a factory reset and you will need to agree to agreements that would not meet the new standards."
Then they would have to block you being able to use such app versions, or make some other provision for proper acceptance of T&Cs. Or pay a large fine each time someone complains. GDPR doesn't care when the app was written. It's about what you do now from now.
Some Android devices come with the Facebook app already installed.
Even after uninstalling the Facebook app two other Facebook related system level apps remain: Facebook Installer and Facebook Manager still using data in the background.
I've even seen Android devices to where the Facebook app could not be uninstalled, only disabled.
I have noticed in the past few weeks, Facebook have deliberately been making their mobile website, the m. website rather bloaty. Before it was very quick at loading, but now it is very slow. This seems to have coincided with the release of the Facebook lite application.
I am running Oreo on my mobile, does that mean that I can block Facebook lite from accessing almost anything and it would work?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
