Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Punishes Devs Who Shared User IDs
A couple weeks ago, we discussed news that some Facebook application developers were selling or accidentally sharing user IDs to advertisers and data brokers in violation of Facebook's privacy terms. Now, the company writes that they've updated the policy to dictate how UIDs can be handled within applications, and also punished the offending developers by blocking access to the site's communication channels for a period of six months. Quoting:
"While we determined that no private user data was sold and confirmed that transfer of these UIDs did not give access to any private data, this violation of our policy is something we take seriously. As such, we are taking action against these developers by instituting a 6-month full moratorium on their access to Facebook communication channels, and we will require these developers to submit their data practices to an audit in the future to confirm that they are in compliance with our policies. This impacts fewer than a dozen, mostly small developers, none of which are in the top 10 applications on Facebook Platform. We have also reached an agreement with Rapleaf, the data broker who came forward to work with us on this situation. Rapleaf has agreed to delete all UIDs in its possession, and they have agreed not to conduct any activities on the Facebook Platform (either directly or indirectly) going forward."
Zoidberg can use Facebook again!
Gotta get a better name.
Translation: If Rapleaf wants to see the sun rise tomorrow, they will do *exactly* as we say.
Sincerely, Facebook's Legal Team.
In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
Because only Facebook is allowed to profit from the data that they collect. Isn't it obvious? These other developers were cutting into the profit stream and that is against the terms of service.
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the idea that Facebook has a privacy policy.
Remember to maintain your supply of
"While we determined that no private user data was sold..."
Isn't this one of the companies (along with google) that declared that "privacy on the web no longer exists" or something along those lines?
hence, no "private user data" can be sold because all user data is public, therefore no crime has been committed.
They don't, they have a PR policy.
Interesting. If you want to make an example out of them, then this seems effective. Still, would they have been so harsh against a dev if they were in the top 10? What if Zynga had done this, do you think FB would have banned them for months?
You just operate for a while collect a bunch of ids, seems like something you would need to track accounts, and once you have a worth treasure trove take the slap on the wrist but only after you have transfered all your applications to another 'developer'?
every anarchist is a baffled dictator. Benito_Mussolini
This impacts fewer than a dozen, mostly small developers, none of which are in the top 10 applications on Facebook Platform.
Why not? Are you trying to suggest that they don't have these practices, or they simply haven't been caught doing it, or they've got the money to grease palms or hire lawyers?
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the idea that Facebook has a privacy policy.
It's easier when you don't take sensationalist headlines at face value.
Those stories about the great privacy terms violations said that Zynga, via Farmville, was a big offender (the story linked to in the back link to the older Slashdot article says this, in fact).
I wonder if they say "anyone who grabs the UID is punished" b/c that freed up some of their biggest developers, like Zynga, who were doing other bad stuff, but not that bad (for some subjective definition of bad)?
So yeah, instead of making a platform where they guard user's data privacy, their policy to prevent abuse is a rule that says "you are not allowed to do this", with no effective way of policing whether or not someone's doing it.
This is like leaving your computer with your private information open to remote logins, with a blank password, announcing on the internet that they can use your computer (for whatever reason there may be) and then saying, "but don't be reading my private information mmmkay?"
Morons...
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
This isn't even closing the door after the horse has bolted (data that's been sold, is sold, any it ain't coming back), this is shouting at somebody for walking out with the horse while still leaving the door wide open.
So... do you hand out little cards to people you know with Facebook accounts that say "My lack-of-caring-list welcomes YOU as its latest entry!"?
Remember to maintain your supply of
Why were they not terminated?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Interesting how the dont do anything about one of there bigger clients! Zynga has done it before and they havent done a thing about it! Yes for all you farmville people they have released data on you!
And they reported them for animal cruelty for good measure.
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
So why isn't Zynga being punished?
Modded "flamebait" because there is no "idiotic" mod? Yes, the plot twist in a beloved movie is roughly the equivalent to people being unable to play a beloved game.
"Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
There are only two possibilities here:
This was a misunderstanding, and the developers involved should get a warning.
This wasn't a misunderstanding, and the developers should be permanently banned to protect facebook users. Otherwise they will just look for other ways to sell data to make money.
Punishments are for dealing with children who don't know the difference between right and wrong. Adults don't generally change their opinions on what's right when they are punished.
So why isn't Zynga being punished?
How do you punish the biggest game company on the planet? That's like trying to punish Microsoft because your webpage doesn't render well in IE.
Because Zynga is more powerful than Facebook itself. If Facebook tries to fuck with Farmville its entire over-30 female population will riot in the streets.
Zynga shares facebook user ids openly through mafia wars. The user images in mafiawars have the facebook ids in them.
I don't have to explain how to find the actual facebook page with that, do I?
Privacy is terrorism.
Facebook's business is selling that information. They really, really do not want to lose the monopoly and ability to monetize it any way they can.
So, of course, they are going to crack down on others selling information that facebook has so carefully accumulated.
They don't, they have a PR policy.
Fortunately Privacy and PR have at least two letters in common. So it's like the same thing, only shorter to read...
The only one allowed to harvest and sell your data on facebook is facebook.
I like how you made it into a Farmville analogy.
Facebook: "Bad developers! You can't sell private user info to advertisers and data brokers. Only we are allowed to do that!"
So Zynga got booted? I am pretty sure that Zynga could do whatever they want and FB would not do a thing about it.
Got Code?
Sure, grandstanding on the issue of privacy while butt-raping it themselves will foil a lot of people. But the key phrase is:
"This impacts fewer than a dozen, mostly small developers, none of which are in the top 10 applications on Facebook Platform"
Would they have done the same if Zynga, which generates a ton of money for them and has a large legal team, had been affected? I guess not.
Facebook staff have been amazed to discover that when Facebook passes users' complete details to application developers and advertisers, 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. "BEGIN 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.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
I just might want to see that...
This over-30 female would be very happy if Farmville would just DIAF.
-monique