Slashdot Mirror


Facebook's Graph Search: Kiss Your Privacy Goodbye

Nerval's Lobster writes "Software developer Jeff Cogswell is back with an extensive under-the-hood breakdown of Facebook's Graph Search, trying to see if peoples' privacy concerns about the social network's search engine are entirely justified. His conclusion? 'Some of the news articles I've read talk about how Graph Search will start small and slowly grow as it accumulates more information. This is wrong—Graph Search has been accumulating information since the day Facebook opened and the first connections were made in the internal graph structure,' he writes. 'People were nervous about Google storing their history, but it pales in comparison to the information Facebook already has on you, me, and roughly a billion other people.' There's much more at the link, including a handy breakdown of graph theory."

245 comments

  1. Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You kissed your privacy goodbye when you signed up for a social network.

    1. Re:Yeah, right by game+kid · · Score: 5, Informative

      As soon as you saw (not clicked!) the Like button, for that matter.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    2. Re:Yeah, right by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Funny

      As soon as I wrote that I was CEO of Shell Oil, owner of the US Treasury and as a imigrant from Jupiter, I lost all privacy. It is they who are cursed, not I.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not even on facebook!

      And I'm scr****ed.

    4. Re:Yeah, right by TwineLogic · · Score: 3, Funny

      This is why the only Like buttons I see are hosted on the web site I am viewing:

      $ cat /etc/hosts
      [...]
      127.0.0.30 outbrain.com
      127.0.0.30 facebook.com

    5. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm not even on facebook!

      And I'm scr****ed.

      scrAMBLed?!?

    6. Re:Yeah, right by Seumas · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly.

      My use of facebook is as follows:

      Register account, to keep someone else from using my name (it happens, I've had internet stalkers for over a decade that have done things like register domains, show up at my door, etc).

      Disable everything that it's possible to disable. Set to notify me by email of private messages, just in case. Disable ability to tag me in photos, post on my wall, etc, etc.

      Put up a user photo on account that says "I DO NOT USE FB. SEND ME AN EMAIL AT >email addy".

      Never touch Facebook again.

    7. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why people think this is some horrible thing out of their power. Just don't use facebook. There are plenty of other avenues to communicate with people that don't involve stomping on your privacy. Literally the only way facebook can exist is by documenting every nuance it can about you.

    8. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This! What good is info if most of it is fake? It's Facebook's loss, not mine.

    9. Re:Yeah, right by Seumas · · Score: 2

      Huh? You don't filter that crap? I filter out all that FB and +1 crap.

    10. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also have to watch out for your friends (sic) that may post your photos all over Farcebook, didn't you know they've been creating shadow profiles of people who refuse to sign up subject to surplus info in their database that could theoretically make up an account where there is none.

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/18/1429223/facebook-is-building-shadow-profiles-of-non-users

    11. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or your friends kissed your privacy goodbye when they signed up for a social network and decided to talk about you on there. Or, you know, on the internet in general.
      I don't have a facebook account, yet I can safely assume that facebook knows at least 3 of my real life friends, how old I am, where I went to school, where I work, my relationship status, what I look like, and a recent ailment - just from material posted to facebook (that I can see - who knows what else is on there that I can't see unless I sign up/'friend' a bunch of people) alone. Couple that information with some general internet sleuthing and a profile of 'me' could easily be built. All without me signing up for a social network.

    12. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      HOSTS is an awesome method for blocking sites like Facebook, shame it doesn't handle wildcarded domains last time I checked.

    13. Re:Yeah, right by kheldan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Every day that I read a news story about how more and more of people's privacy on Facebook is being violated as they monetize that data more and more, the happier I am that I bailed out when I did.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    14. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is so stupid. I use Facebook weekly, to keep in touch with a few relatives and real-life friends.
      I've never used the "Share" function; it never made any sense to me. If I want to include a link in a post, I paste it.
      I've certainly never done what TFA talks about; sharing something inappropriate then changing my mind and deleting it.
      I really don't know what invasions of privacy I'm supposed to fear here.

    15. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Never heard of data aggregation?

      Are you friends with any on facebook, for example? They can extrapolate things about you from even that.

    16. Re:Yeah, right by Synerg1y · · Score: 2

      I'd imagine that's a false assumption and most it is very real. Remember they're data mining, not sampling.

    17. Re:Yeah, right by Synerg1y · · Score: 2

      The funny thing is it doesn't document anything you don't let it. One can argue that the privacy settings should be adjusted by default to protect you... but you're getting a free account on a social network, what do you expect, a parade in your honor & some $?

    18. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd rather not use FB at ALL.

      Facebook shouldn't be allowing registered users to tag non-registered users anyhow. it should be a dialog box of registered users under that name, if you are not registered you ain't tagged, simple.

    19. Re:Yeah, right by treeves · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm not even on facebook!

      And I'm scr****ed.

      scrAMBLed?!?

      scrOTUMed.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    20. Re:Yeah, right by pootypeople · · Score: 0

      How is it "stomping on your privacy" to share data you have agreed to share? If people are naive enough to believe Facebook was setup solely for peoples' enjoyment, that's their own damn fault. If you share things online you're uncomfortable with other people knowing about that's your own problem. Expecting Facebook to make your privacy their business is silly.

    21. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      curse you, you've raised APK!

      I'm outtahere...

    22. Re:Yeah, right by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      But then Facebook couldn't collect information about unregistered users!

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    23. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You kissed your privacy goodbye when you existed as a living human being with physical properties in a universe where such properties are observable by other physical human beings capable of logical inference.

      FTFY

    24. Re:Yeah, right by kelemvor4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The funny thing is it doesn't document anything you don't let it. One can argue that the privacy settings should be adjusted by default to protect you... but you're getting a free account on a social network, what do you expect, a parade in your honor & some $?

      Nope, I'd expect to pay for the "free" account with my private information. This is why I don't use Facebook, and is also gp's point. Just because they're bartering for your information rather than charging you dollars does not mean it's free.

    25. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Facebook may soon have to retract the ability to tag non-registered users if Europe's laws get passed.

    26. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's why you should run your own recursive DNS resolver and override entire zones. I recommend Unbound. It runs on Windows too.

    27. Re:Yeah, right by X0563511 · · Score: 3

      Don't forget facebook.net and fb.net! (probably fb.com too).

      Not to mention anything that goes through EC2 or akamai.

      (not so perfect a solution these days, is my point)

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    28. Re: Yeah, right by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 1

      The word is "scroogled" ;)

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
    29. Re:Yeah, right by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, as much info I have in there is fake, I can't convince my friends who grew up with facebook in college to fake everything. They know things, I show up in pictures, I get invited to events, ect. The fake stuff makes it more difficult, but not impossible. Its like a single DES encryption. Just really there to deter those with out the motivation to crack.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    30. Re:Yeah, right by hawguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly.

      My use of facebook is as follows:

      Register account, to keep someone else from using my name (it happens, I've had internet stalkers for over a decade that have done things like register domains, show up at my door, etc).

      Disable everything that it's possible to disable. Set to notify me by email of private messages, just in case. Disable ability to tag me in photos, post on my wall, etc, etc.

      Put up a user photo on account that says "I DO NOT USE FB. SEND ME AN EMAIL AT >email addy".

      Never touch Facebook again.

      How does this keep your mythical decade long stalkers from setting up a Facebook profile with your name? My name is not all that common, but there are dozens of people on Facebook with my name -- including 1 in the same town as me.

      If you never touch Facebook again, how will you know about your stalkers profile? And what would he do with this fake profile anyway?

    31. Re:Yeah, right by kwerle · · Score: 2

      No, you kissed your privacy goodbye when you started interacting with others.

      Your friends all submitted their email accounts so that facebook could mine them for friends. You are connected to all your friends' accounts on facebook (though not visibly to the outside), and they can mine your address for associations and know to a great degree who you are, what you like, etc - because they know who your friends are and what they like.

    32. Re:Yeah, right by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly.

      Fake all you want to, they still have you nailed.

      People who doubt this should RTFA.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    33. Re:Yeah, right by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not its not an awesome method.

      You're right it does not support wildcards so putting www.facebook.com in there does nothing top stop, the java script on every other site out there from posting to trackyourass.facebook.com

      I makes things point to a resource that won't answer so unless you take additional steps like running a httpd that will generate a 404, so it can make things dirt slow.

      Lots of pages are designed (badly) and need images to exist or the layout breaks, or is messed up otherwise.

      So no your hosts file is not an awesome method. A proxy like privoxy for example though there are other good ones starts to come closer to something that might be a decent solution. It could at least serve dummy images, use regular expressions to strip posts, and gets inside iframes to .*facebook.(com|net); .*fbcdn.com and others. etc.

      Really people STOP using your hosts file. Its like the worst possible answer.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    34. Re:Yeah, right by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      This is why I left facebook in November. I mean delete account facebook, not deactivate facebook. Granted they might have old data kicking around, though it is out of date. I realised that the power of facebook is its ability to extrapolate you on your friends. You can't give in fake info based on what you like, events that you are tagged in, etc, etc. That is very very dangerous IMO...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    35. Re:Yeah, right by icebike · · Score: 1

      This is so stupid. I use Facebook weekly, to keep in touch with a few relatives and real-life friends.
      I've never used the "Share" function; it never made any sense to me. If I want to include a link in a post, I paste it.
      I've certainly never done what TFA talks about; sharing something inappropriate then changing my mind and deleting it.
      I really don't know what invasions of privacy I'm supposed to fear here.

      Go back and re-read TFA.
      If changing your mind and deleting something you posted is all you got out of the article you have TOTALLY missed the point.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    36. Re:Yeah, right by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      No, that's not a funny thing. It documents everything. The privacy settings control the flow of information from you to other people, it doesn't control what facebook sees, collects, and uses*.

      Theoreticaly some settings do specifically address what Facebook does with your info, but I don't trust them to not do it. Plus, there isn't a way to tell facebook to not use your information in a way they haven't created a privacy setting for. There really good at asking for forgiveness, rather than permission to do new things to you.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    37. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh... That depends on what you're doing on it. I don't bother with putitng everything up on Faceplant, for example.

      I'm kind of amazed that people didn't figure that one out on their own- it's not like it's rocket science, yanno...

    38. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI you can't disable people tagging you in pictures, only them showing up on your wall

    39. Re:Yeah, right by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      You need a lot more than that to properly block facebook and company. What you're really wanting is a whitelist proxy. I'm about to add one to my network for other reasons.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    40. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Absolutely! I am not active on Facebook. I talked to a brother in Chicago and a friend in Louisiana. I have never logged into Facebook from an ip address that would geo locate me to my home state. Mobile ip, proxies or tor (or combinations of the three). And always from a Linux live cd, so no cookies from anywhere else.

      Social media is blocked at my home and work, I can't accidentally login. Nothing in my login history says I live where I do. It says the opposite. Yes, I have an overly paranoid account.

      One day I turned off my ad blocking software and found quite a few personalized ads for my location, and it confused me quite a bit. How? When i did that a year before, Facebook thought I lived across the country and frequently traveled.

      My best explanation is that I gave the friend in LA my phone number (in person) and when she added it to her contact book, a Facebook sync confirmed my number as matching me. She possibly added my real birthdate and more.I put that data into any form and it now matches that account. So although I have never given Facebook any more useful data than my (very common) name, they now have enough info to match me on anything in real databases.

      As someone who has tried their hardest to fudge databases with false info, there is no use. They will get the data some other way and then fill in the rest. As it has been mentioned before, even if you don't have an account you will have a ghost profile in the database if your name is in someone else's contact book. A fake name does nothing if 20 of your friends or relatives list you as your real name in their contact books and they sync.

    41. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't tell me that. APK will be along in a few hours to educate you on the HOSTS file.

    42. Re:Yeah, right by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      I have Facebook's known IP ranges blocked incoming and outgoing at my router. It's actually quite a lot of ranges, as they've purchased IP ranges from others (but 69.171.224.0/19 and 66.220.144.0/20 will stop most of Facebook's crap). As a result, I see a surprising number of frames and whatnot which simply have "forbidden" text in them. They occur on a wide selection of sites.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    43. Re:Yeah, right by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

      Exactly.

      My use of facebook is as follows:

      Register account, to keep someone else from using my name (it happens, I've had internet stalkers for over a decade that have done things like register domains, show up at my door, etc).

      Disable everything that it's possible to disable. Set to notify me by email of private messages, just in case. Disable ability to tag me in photos, post on my wall, etc, etc.

      Put up a user photo on account that says "I DO NOT USE FB. SEND ME AN EMAIL AT >email addy".

      Never touch Facebook again.

      If you never touch Facebook again, you're in trouble. You see, they keep changing their privacy controls, and make everything opt-out by default (meaning when they change the controls, the privacy-detrimental "features" are enabled by default). As a result, unless you check in regularly and verify your privacy settings, you might be surprised at what is enabled right now (even if you disabled it in the past).

      I just avoid facebook by having someone else with my name on there -- I can claim that anything on facebook is related to them, not me. Someone wants to create a fakebook page? Fine; it's demonstrably not me, as everyone knows I don't use facebook. Maybe it's the other guy. Since I can prove that I exist somewhere different from him and have an extremely different personality, anything that goes on Facebook is going to be assumed not to be me by default.

      Of course, I'm sure if Slashdot pulled a graph analysis on me, all sorts of stuff would be revealed....

    44. Re:Yeah, right by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

      To really leave facebook, you're gonna have to take off and nuke it from orbit. And by "it," I mean all their data centers and anywhere their backups reside. Because just because you're no longer adding info -- indeed, even if you've never joined at all -- they're still accumulating it.

      Not that leaving facebook is a bad idea, though. At least you're not intentionally adding more personal information, and that's worth something.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    45. Re:Yeah, right by Hadlock · · Score: 2

      According to their privacy statement, at least the last time I read it, they purge your data after 90 days, and then purge their cold backups after 180 days.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    46. Re:Yeah, right by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

      How is it "stomping on your privacy" to share data you have agreed to share? If people are naive enough to believe Facebook was setup solely for peoples' enjoyment, that's their own damn fault. If you share things online you're uncomfortable with other people knowing about that's your own problem. Expecting Facebook to make your privacy their business is silly.

      To play the other devil's advocate... it's "stomping on your privacy" because most countries have privacy laws, and citizens expect Facebook to honor them.

      OK: enough of the devil. It all comes down to the Insurance paradigm.

      There are two types of insurance: comprehensive and named-damages. When using Facebook, most people assume they have comprehensive privacy protection -- meaning that their privacy is protected except in the ways they explicitly allow Facebook to use it. However, Facebook operates on a "named damages" model, where unless they say they're protecting your privacy in a certain defined area, they aren't. They get in trouble with governments every once in a while over this, and then add the appropriate legislated items to their privacy list, and continue to ignore it everywhere else.

      In short, they've extended the insurance scam into the PII arena. Likely, it'll be as profitable for them as it is for insurance companies.

    47. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That APK guy is a such a psycho, it's scary. His full name is Alexander Peter Kowalski, and he lives with his mom at:
      903 East Division St.
      Syracuse, NY 13208
      DOB: 01/31/1965

      He is also suspected to be a faux terrorist. The FBI is looking for this guy, so I encourage everyone to give them details of APK if they have any. This guy's sick reign of terror must stop. Check out this link:
      http://video.foxnews.com/v/1843962156001/fbi-asks-for-help-solving-15-year-old-anthrax-mystery/ [foxnews.com]
      As soon as I saw that video, I thought: "Wow! That's APK described exactly!" It seems that a 35+ man with mental issues, living in Syracuse, NY has been sending out threatening letters with white powder in them to people. It's not actually anthrax, but it is claimed to be in the letters. This guy is high up on the FBI's most wanted list.

      More info here: http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/09/fbi_wades_through_tips_that_co.html [syracuse.com]
      You can report info on APK by calling 1-800-CALL-FBI or submitting the form at tips.fbi.gov. Please help stop this guy.

    48. Re:Yeah, right by Wookact · · Score: 1

      They'll only do that to the accounts registered in Europe. Everyone else will still be able to tag non registered users.

    49. Re:Yeah, right by Wookact · · Score: 1

      The fact that they are storing information about non users is what the problem is.

    50. Re:Yeah, right by ArsonSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not me because I don't want to be put on a list of "hiding something because they don't use facebook like everyone else." Instead I have a script that finds the most common likes that average people click and it automatically likes them by me as well. My profile fits pretty much right in the middle.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    51. Re:Yeah, right by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      ...and the more and more facebook doesn't care as they know everything about you through inference from others you know anyway.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    52. Re:Yeah, right by Grashnak · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      My use of facebook is as follows:

      Register account, to keep someone else from using my name (it happens, I've had internet stalkers for over a decade that have done things like register domains, show up at my door, etc).

      Disable everything that it's possible to disable. Set to notify me by email of private messages, just in case. Disable ability to tag me in photos, post on my wall, etc, etc.

      Put up a user photo on account that says "I DO NOT USE FB. SEND ME AN EMAIL AT >email addy".

      Never touch Facebook again.

      So, if I understand this correctly, you think that by registering a Facebook account in your name, no one else can register a different Facebook account in the same name? Did you miss the part where Facebook user names aren't unique? There are a couple of hundred Facebook accounts with exactly the same name as mine.

      Grats on failing at the most elaborate yet pointless Facebook paranoia scheme I've seen yet.

      --
      Life needs more saving throws.
    53. Re:Yeah, right by Dins · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure they do.

      And if the FBI comes looking for it 190 days later (with or without a warrant) are they just going to say, "Sorry, we can't help you"?

      I'd love it to be true, but somehow I doubt it...

    54. Re:Yeah, right by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Not specific to your post, but a slight rant based on all posts:

      Facebook doesn't click the like button for you, nor does it ask you to talk about your ED in post, so that it can try to sell you viagra. That's all people's doings, facebook is just the harvester of people's stupidity and over-sharing. And ya, they do have a nasty habit of turning stuff on and implementing new features with privacy concerns... but again they can't share what you don't give them.

      Also, I'm slightly confused as to what exactly people's problems with facebook logging their information is, what exactly has facebook done with this information? Did you know google has served you targeted ads before facebook came into existence?

      I think this entire discussion is being led on by people who have never used facebook because they don't have a reason to if you know what i mean. I'm gonna go like slashdot on facebook, maybe it might serve me an ad to a site where people actually comprehend privacy and security and the nature of the internet.

    55. Re:Yeah, right by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Register account, to keep someone else from using my name (it happens, I've had internet stalkers for over a decade that have done things like register domains, show up at my door, etc).

      Your precaution seems wise, although possibly not sufficient. This kind of facebook impersonation happened to my father-in-law last week. And he has a facebook account that he uses regularly. Even so, an impostor created a look-alike account and asked his friends for money. I'm not quite clear on how the scam was uncovered, either my father-in-law noticed something or one of his friends thought it odd that there were two of him. I didn't ask for clarification since I heard about this while walking through the room while my wife was on speakerphone with her dad, so I was technically eavesdropping.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    56. Re:Yeah, right by PrimeNumber · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, but do you believe that Facebook will actually do that?

      This from a guy (Zuckerburg) that said his users were idiots for trusting him. Repeatedly he has lied, deceived and cheated his business associates, users, and media.

    57. Re:Yeah, right by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Unless you mysteriously don't give it to them. So... just because it's the internet, does that mean common sense goes out the door... for everybody? Mind buying me a boat while we're on the internet? There can't possibly be any real world repercussions!

    58. Re:Yeah, right by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. That's not to say that they don't have a private encrypted line straight to the mega datacenter the NSA (CIA?) just set up in Utah, who knows what happens to that copy of the data.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    59. Re:Yeah, right by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      Unless you mysteriously don't give it to them. So... just because it's the internet, does that mean common sense goes out the door... for everybody?

      I don't think it's true for literally everybody, but I'd bet it does for "most" people.

    60. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you kissed your privacy goodbye the moment your friends signed up for a social network. You signing up is optional.

    61. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knowing Europe, they'd probably go as far as banning any tagging of non-registered users if the GPS of the picture happens to be in any coordinates within the entire EU.

    62. Re:Yeah, right by hey · · Score: 1

      There's the facebook blocker browser plugin.

    63. Re:Yeah, right by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but "mysteriously not giving information to Facebook" requires advanced computer knowledge and about a week of your time.

      You will need to install about 10 different browser extensions, block IP ranges, deal with broken pages because of JavaScript and cookie issues, randomly fake your browser ID and a number of other things. Because every time you connect to the internet, you are "mysteriously giving information to Facebook" even if you don't know it.

      I still keep up with it, but my girlfriend gave up on "mysteriously not giving information to Facebook" after doing so broke her online banking (which reports to Facebook) and online payment methods (which pull in mysterious scripts from a dozen mysterious domains).

      If you as much as look at "the Internet", they are stalking you. "Simply not giving information to Facebook" is a bit like Jason Bourne.

    64. Re:Yeah, right by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      Facebook doesn't click the like button for you, nor does it ask you to talk about your ED in post, so that it can try to sell you viagra.

      They don't need to click it. They serve the link from their servers so they know that you've seen the like button. Then they check your browser fingerprint and, if you are particularly stupid, your facebook cookies and voila -- they know which webpages you read, and when, and they know the exact location where you were when you read it. Every online newspaper you read, they know which stories you like, which stories you don't like.

      You don't have to click anything. The "like" thing is a gimmick. As long as you SEE that button on non-facebook pages, they are tracking you. And there are other things that are tracking you that you don't even see.

      I'm astonished that even on slashdot people do not understand these things.

    65. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that your "friends" can register an account on your behalf when they get tired of not being able to tag you. Facebook technicly doesn't allow this but they have no mechanism for detecting the activity and no incentive to enforce the rule.

      Then you have no control over the account.

    66. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never joined Facebook but I'm sure that they've still collect data on me and have created a phantom profile... will I show up in the graph? Isn't this trespassing?

    67. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why facebook.com, along with many of their subdomains (when I discover a new one I add it), all point to 127.0.0.1 on my machine :)

    68. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK dude, I think you're exaggerating Facebook's powers at this point. It's not like they somehow told random advertisers where you live based off someone else having your contact info. It's more likely that you were not using your uber proxies and IP geolocation based on your ISP's point of presene is why you got targeted ads, also based on the websites you were on at the time... either that or you're trolling right now.

    69. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why you should run your own recursive DNS resolver and override entire zones. I recommend Unbound. It runs on Windows too.

      *click link*

      "The site's security certificate is not trusted! You attempted to reach www.unbound.net, but the server presented a certificate issued by an entity that is not trusted by your computer's operating system. This may mean that the server has generated its own security credentials, which Google Chrome cannot rely on for identity information, or an attacker may be trying to intercept your communications."

    70. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not me because I don't want to be put on a list of "hiding something because they don't use facebook like everyone else."

      What, you don't want to be on the cool list?

    71. Re:Yeah, right by sphealey · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that Facebook isn't being operated by the CIA or similar 3-letter agency, which isn't immediately obvious to me.

      sPh

    72. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI you can't disable people tagging you in pictures, only them showing up on your wall

      Yes you can, the setting talked about here prevents photo tagging and the one above it prevents general tagging. http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/02/02/facebook-turns-facial-recognition-back-on/

    73. Re:Yeah, right by yoshi_mon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, you kissed your privacy goodbye when you started interacting with others.

      And by you mean being born.

      Be it from Experian, Equifax, TransUnion, and or Innovis. From something like LexisNexis or another background check type company. Or say even your past employers who have HR files on you. There are collections of data about you out there and often it is indeed for sale.

      Here is the thing. While there has been a successful effort to deregulate everything and anything, and any attempts at trying to regulate anything is met by fierce and well funded oppression, by in large the things I listed above still have some regulation tied to it. All the more so when the companies involved are looking to sell/share that information.

      "Social media" information however by enlarge unregulated data that is being sold/traded/hacked. That is what most of us who know more than just, "Durrrrr your information is out there anyway so who cares what I do online," understand. And why we tend to have some serious issues that we feel need to be discussed about the way this data is being gathered and analyzed without any oversight.

      --

      Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
    74. Re:Yeah, right by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      A more complete list (but not guaranteed 100% complete) follows...

      31.13.24.0/21
      31.13.64.0/18
      66.220.144.0/20
      69.63.176.0/20
      69.171.224.0/19
      74.119.76.0/22
      103.4.96.0/22
      173.252.64.0/18
      204.15.20.0/22

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    75. Re:Yeah, right by GoogleShill · · Score: 1

      Holy Shit!

      You know where he lives, and you won't tell the FBI?!?!?! Fer Christ's sake man!!!! Only YOU can stop his faux reign of terror!

    76. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That isn't only a ToS violation (which is reportable) but could also pass as identify theft in the UK.

    77. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whilst I'm not the AC that posted the FYI statement, I'd like to know how the tagging works exactly, we have 200 John Smiths and 60 of them have turned tagging off including the 'John Smith' that you use, can't he still arbitrarily tag you despite not linking your account specifically? or even tag one of the other 200?

    78. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well actually, much like thermonuclear war: The only way to win is to not play the game.

      It's possible I'm tagged in a few photos on facebook, however I made it a point never to have a MySpace nor Facebook account, and to rant until I was blue in the face on why that was so. Coming from a pre-internet background where everybody used handles online, and unless you somehow become busom buddies you'd rarely let out personal info I assumed that everybody else coming in would be indoctrinated the same.

      Boy was I wrong.

    79. Re:Yeah, right by Darby · · Score: 1

      I'm not quite clear on how the scam was uncovered, either my father-in-law noticed something or one of his friends thought it odd that there were two of him.

      Not to probe too deeply into his personal affairs, but his friend didn't think it was odd that he was asking his friends for money?

    80. Re:Yeah, right by Darby · · Score: 1

      but again they can't share what you don't give them

      But again as has been pointed out time and time again they absolutely can and absolutely do.

      I don't have an account and have never visited the site. My brother does and has told me all the things he's found about me going all the way back to high school and that was a damn long time ago.

      Your failure to grasp the simple basic fact which has been presented over and over that *other people* share things about you and facebook uses that is pretty stunning.

      Other people including some I haven't seen in 20+ years and would never have any interest in seeing again have allowed them to compile a profile on me in spite of the fact that I've never agreed to their terms of service, never received any value from their unauthorized use of my personal information and would never agree to such.

      Feel however you do about whether that is good, bad or indifferent, but for the love of anything decent, pull your head out of your ass and understand the basic concepts under discussion.

    81. Re:Yeah, right by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      You can't tag non-registered users /per se/ ... but what's stopping me from posting photos that have your name on them on myspace or geocities back in the day? Nothing, and they'd be just as indexed.

      The difference with Facebook is that *only* Facebook can aggregate the data, something Google has complained about.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    82. Re:Yeah, right by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Facebook is no different from anything else for that matter. Making yourself a business card does not prevent someone else from making one with your name on it and a different address.

      People haven't got this whole inter-connected world thing into their minds yet ...

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    83. Re:Yeah, right by kwerle · · Score: 1

      "Social media" information however by enlarge unregulated data that is being sold/traded/hacked. That is what most of us who know more than just, "Durrrrr your information is out there anyway so who cares what I do online," understand. And why we tend to have some serious issues that we feel need to be discussed about the way this data is being gathered and analyzed without any oversight.

      Do we?

      Why?

    84. Re:Yeah, right by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      If everyone but you is posting real information,and referring to you occasionally by name, your online persona is cracked. And really, that last bit if minutiae, your name, is insignificant compared to everything else. Your name is not the keying field, so it's not like lacking a real name for you they haven't had a way to aggregate other info band you can say you work at Goldman Sachs, but if the ip youre logging into during the day resolves to a college ip, they know better. Just as if you say you own the federal reserve, but they spot you logging in at night from a slum and constantly logging in along bus routes, they know better. And logging in isn't even logging in, it's just visiting a site with a like button embedded in it.

      How tricky you were. I'll give you credit for at least trying, though!

    85. Re:Yeah, right by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      At least it's voluntary, and the vast majority of info is info you provided knowingly. Maybe not knowing every way it could be used, but knowingly none the less. Google on the other hand, you can't escape no matter how hard you try.

    86. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I makes things point to a resource that won't answer so unless you take additional steps like running a httpd that will generate a 404, so it can make things dirt slow.

      Err, point the entries to a null route like 0.0.0.0. Instant failure returned.

    87. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like you would have blinked an eye if I had just given you the HTTP link. The certificate is issued by CACert, a "peer to peer" certificate authority, and the common name is *.nlnetlabs.nl, the domain of the authors of Unbound. If that scares you, perhaps messing with DNS isn't for you anyway.

    88. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm the AC you're responding to. Thank you for reading. As an AC I always assume the things I post get buried and are never read.

      http://www.facebook.com/friends/?ref=tn#!/friends/?filter=pfp

      Click on that link, that's your facebook phonebook.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/oct/06/facebook-privacy-phone-numbers-upload

      Guardian article talks about exactly this.

      Facebook is the only site I visit through that "uber proxy" (all 7 of them). The only other sites that I visit before facebook are mozilla privacy plugins and... a geo ip site.

      This isn't really that hard to understand. I can hide my ip or ditch cookies, change my browser fingerprint, block every tracking method I can think of. But what's the point? The area code from my telephone number gave away my location. That simple.

        What is your problem with this? Don't you know that every background check company on the internet has been doing this on a smaller scale for about 15 years? They match names to email address and cross reference with DOB, if it checks out, it gets put in the list of confirmed identities. They add public records data that matches with that. The information they had was always taken from cookies you received doing surveys or shopping websites when you bought something. Or in some cases just the stuff you looked at. Somewhat reliable, but sometimes not. Either way, lots of junk data. And people figured out how to avoid the data collection by these companies.

      Think of facebook's userbase as doing the exact same thing. They log in and update the "background check" database for themselves and everyone they know.

      All I did was offer a personal anecdote as an example of something that facebook is known to do. I didn't invent a facebook bogeyman, and I did not link them to a three letter agency like some other posters. Everything I have said could be backed up by RTFA or others posted on slashdot. The worst conclusion you can come to from reading my post is that Facebook saves every bit of data given to it and cross checks it. Supposedly to help you find friends, but quite possibly to fluff out your profile and target ads.

    89. Re:Yeah, right by mabhatter654 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But they don't purge spot for "friendX 1172" connected to your other friends. Basically they just take "your" name out and then fill it back in from other people's data.

      It's like how Google already has you by search terms, and web page cookies, and location/zip code before YOU ever actually sign into the service. So you can get "your" ads after a few minutes of surfing anonymously at the library.

    90. Re:Yeah, right by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      No, they will charge them a LOT of money because YOU closed your account, so the data is FACEBOOKS property, not yours. This is similar to how the Credit Report agencies work. The information about payments made by customers is private to BUSINESSES that sell/pay them to have it. So the Feds don't have to get a warrant... In fact they CANNOT get a warrant, because its collected by a third party.

      But the Feds can just PAY to get that data!!! And pay they do!

    91. Re:Yeah, right by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      So something that sees a request to "Slashdot.org" and doesn't pull (or flags) every incoming response from any different IP/domain? That would be easy for small sites, but large international sites like Yahoo might get difficult... But that's kind of the point they make so YOU can't filter that way and get a good experience.

    92. Re:Yeah, right by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Like you said, even if you block things in your browser, the web pages with embedded Like buttons already contacted Facebook with your browser information to "help to be friends". You just don't SEE the image returned.

    93. Re:Yeah, right by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Because people that look at more than 6.7 LOLZcat pictures per day are lonely people that should get charged more for health insurance for being boring. Or people that watch too many FPSRussia videos shouldn't be allowed to purchase nerf guns.

      It's all "public" info ... Wait till important companies start using it.

    94. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DHCP effectively breaks Facebook's profiling. Every time Facebook will get a new IP address, which means even if they make shadow accounts they will have scattered profiles of each new IP address.

    95. Re:Yeah, right by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Yep, then again, for my specific purposes, those sites aren't on the whitelist anyways, at least not for a while.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    96. Re:Yeah, right by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      I'm not quite clear on how the scam was uncovered, either my father-in-law noticed something or one of his friends thought it odd that there were two of him.

      Not to probe too deeply into his personal affairs, but his friend didn't think it was odd that he was asking his friends for money?

      OK, it sounds like a friend did notice this was out of character, but I'm still not sure whether my father-in-law had uncovered the plot before his friend did or what the time-frame of the scam was. I don't think even father-in-law knows how long it went on.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    97. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First I use a separate user account only to log-in to FaceBook (and a fake name on FB).

      They know that I bought a $$$$ high-end watch that I never talked about on FB and which hardly anyone of my friend knows about?

      They know about my bike which I never posted on FB?

      They know about the vacation places I go to (and from which I don't check my FB account)?

      They know about my job?

      They know I'm a free-mason? A thief? An undercover agent?

      Stop the knee-jerking please.

      People who hardly post anything to FB are quite protected: they certainly do not "know everything about you" when you don't post anything and when even your friends are unaware of what you did.

    98. Re:Yeah, right by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      Like you said, even if you block things in your browser, the web pages with embedded Like buttons already contacted Facebook with your browser information to "help to be friends".

      I use FireGloves, so my browser information is randomised and different for each page I visit. Fingerprinting won't work (or at least, it will be extremely difficult).

      The only thing that could happen would be if the third-party page sends my IP to Facebook. That would be a rather big stinker.

    99. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what I thought as soon as i saw the words "HOSTS file" in a post. It's like an incantation for summoning Satan himself.

    100. Re:Yeah, right by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Let's just say, you'd be surprised and the difference between how much you thought you were not on facebook compared to how much you are.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    101. Re:Yeah, right by kheldan · · Score: 1

      People I know know better than to do that, or post pictures of me, and they never use my legal name anyways, so screw you, buddy, and the horse you rode in on.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    102. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's relatively easy to defend against by configuring your browser to block third-party cookies.

    103. Re:Yeah, right by cavebison · · Score: 1

      You kissed your privacy goodbye when you signed up for a social network.

      Then you're doing it wrong. I signed up using a pseudonym - my real first name and a play on the last one. My friends (the real ones) know it's me of course. FB knows nothing about me except who my 17 friends are and, by association with a handful of likes, which city I live it.

      FB doesn't know my address. It doesn't know my phone number. Nor the school I went to, the job I have, who my relatives are, my birthday or anything else. Anyone who gave up all that info about themselves just to sign up for a stupid web site are perhaps unfortunate, but I certainly don't get a lesser experience out of FB than they do with all their needlessly accurate personal data on it. Oh, except that the ads (if I allowed them to show) would be a bit less relevant for me.

      FB doesn't even know what sites I visit, since I use Chrome for FB and Firefox to browse. Never the twain shall meet.

      So no, it's quite easy to retain your privacy and still get what you want out of FB.

    104. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      They know things, I show up in pictures, I get invited to events

      Photos of you? going to events? Well then facebook knows things that aren't fake. Your still being tracked. Its called "data aggregation". Doesn't even matter if you hace an account of not. Phots linked to your name or events you were at and your so called "friends" posted you were there then FB has a gost profile on you. Even if you fake it you are still promoting their evasive shit. Even if you fake it they still know real things about your life and can track you.

    105. Re:Yeah, right by Gen_Music · · Score: 1

      Far far easier to do this actually. Aggregate your friends and friends' friendslist data and geolocate all of them, then keyword search your and their communications for your name and 'location data' be it absolute (London) or relative (down the road) when they know where everyone else lives it's not hard to work out where you must be. Lets not forget there are also Telephone directories, Census data, voting register and plenty of other data they readily have access to.

      Not to mention your user agent, installed fonts and 'frequent access points' allow them to build a profile of you regardless of your location. Facebook knows tor exit nodes and still finds ways to identify between multiple users on the same node, that I know for sure.

    106. Re:Yeah, right by Gen_Music · · Score: 1

      Actually it is, and always has been like that. Facebook is in the market for targeted ads. If it knows where you live, it doesn't matter where it got the data, it's going to use it to profit.

    107. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known facebook close accounts that are accessed using Tor exit nodes, just a heads up in case you're wondering why you are getting told you can't use your account.

    108. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook has much better algorithms to access and datamine that data than the likes of MySpace or Geocities back in the day.

      Also, I don't remember Geocities ever creating phantom accounts of non-registered users, but then I never used that ever so I wouldn't know for certain.

      I'm just glad I don't use ANY of this social networking crap and see it for what it really is.

      Do the world a favor and tell people it's cool to NOT have a Facebook account or whatever is the sheep flock to in a few years from now.

    109. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one can answer me? The AC post above is mine and I'm still waiting for answers.

      Inquisitive minds need to know.

  2. I was under the impression... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    the minute you logged into FB you had to kiss your privacy goodbye?

    1. Re:I was under the impression... by Eightbitgnosis · · Score: 1

      Nope, they collect information based on IP address for those not on FB too

  3. What does FaceBook have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What does FaceBook have on me? It has my email address. It has my cell number. Other than that it contains a lot of innocuous posts that I couldn't care less who read.

    1. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      It has your connections.

    2. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What does FaceBook have on me? It has my email address. It has my cell number. Other than that it contains a lot of innocuous posts that I couldn't care less who read.

      They have your ip-address that, I'm sure, can be connected to you.
      They have lots of data about your internet-activities.
      Privacy doesn't necessarily mean that other facebook-users can or can't see what's on your page, more dangerous is the fact that Zuckerberg has all kinds of intel on you based on whatever you do on the internet.
      And you are not the one who decides whether you have something to hide or not.

    3. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Lazere · · Score: 2

      Why does it have your cell number? I certainly wouldn't put mine on there...

    4. Re:What does FaceBook have? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      And if you're using anything resembling a standard browser for Facebook and other things, they know everywhere you go on the web...and associate it with your real name.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    5. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Why does it have your cell number? I certainly wouldn't put mine on there...

      I think it nags you for your number "in case you forget your password" or something like that.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    6. Re:What does FaceBook have? by __aaeihw9960 · · Score: 1

      Define for me, "Standard Browser." If you would, please.

    7. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Lazere · · Score: 2

      So does google/youtube. That doesn't mean they're getting it.

    8. Re:What does FaceBook have? by cozziewozzie · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe that by "standard browser" he means any browser which does any of the following:

      - Javascript
      - Cookies
      - Flash

      If your browser does any of those, you are being tracked every time you open it. You don't even need a facebook account and you don't need to use google. If you wish to stop being tracked, you will have the install at least the following extensions for your browser:

      - NoScript (for malicious javascript)
      - Ghostery (for cross-site tracking)
      - CS lite (for flexible cookie management)
      - BetterPrivacy (for Flash-based cookies)
      - AdBlockPlus (for more tracking)
      - https anywhere (for man-in-the-middle snooping)
      - FireGloves (for browser fingerprinting)

      and configure all of them to only use a whitelist, and explicitly disable Facebook, Google, Twitter and anything similar. Then you'll need to restart your browser at regular intervals to deter session cookies. You'll also need to reconnect to your ISP regularly to thwart IP-based tracking.

      Yes, there used to be a time when using the web was easy. Now Facebook and Google have turned it into THIS.

    9. Re:What does FaceBook have? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Ooh didn't know about FireGloves, gonna add that...

      But even with all these, IP-based tracking could still be a problem.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You forgot RefControl and RequestPolicy

    11. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need to put your cell phone number on there. If the people on your friends list on Facebook sync their contact list to find friends (or likely just clicked yes at every prompt) then your info is already uploaded. You're their friend, you have the same full name, same birthday. Facebook has your number. Oh, and your email address.

      This is true even if you do not have a Facebook account. You have a ghost profile waiting to be linked with this known information.

    12. Re:What does FaceBook have? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Most of those don't matter because most Facebook tracking is server-side now. The page you request sends a "serial numbered" like button back. It doesn't matter if YOU never see the button... The server ASKED for it... So between the IP address and these requests Facebook has all they need for the "empty spot a user should be". They just file them away until like soap bubbles the "empty spots" connect to bigger spots.

    13. Re:What does FaceBook have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RequestPolicy is also very efficient, although it does not seem to guard against HTTPS requests.

    14. Re:What does FaceBook have? by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      Can you recommend a page that explains this in more detail? I'm interested, but I don't understand it.

      You request a page from NY Times. The NY Times serves you an HTML page (+JS) which includes a "Like" button from Facebook servers. Firefox tries to connect to FB to display the button and run Facebook JS code. Ghostery scrubs such links and you never connect to Facebook. Facebook has nothing, since you've only ever connected to the NY Times. Where's the catch?

      Or do you mean that the NY Times will report your IP number to Facebook directly without you being involved?

      I never go to Facebook, so any serial numbers embedded in their pages don't affect me.

  4. Garbage in, garbage out by tipo159 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have been peppering my FB check-ins with places that I have been to, noting events that never took place, mixed in with real check-ins. I have set my "Lives in" city to somewhere different every day this year. Unless you know me, good luck figuring out what on my FB page is real and what isn't.

    1. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Old97 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Timmy, is that you?

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    2. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Stele · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sounds like you have a lot of free time on your hands. Like most Facebook users.

    3. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the reality is that no one gives two craps about you or your updates. Hope t gives you a warm feeling that you are "sticking it to the man".

    4. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm sure FB keeps IP logs, and I'm sure that's enough to figure out what is true and what isn't based on your location. You sound far too complacent to be capable outsmarting FB anyway

    5. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      I have been peppering my FB check-ins with places that I have been to, noting events that never took place, mixed in with real check-ins. I have set my "Lives in" city to somewhere different every day this year. Unless you know me, good luck figuring out what on my FB page is real and what isn't.

      The thing about Graph search, is your friends know you, and they, (presumably), are not engaged in such useless attempts at deception. So regardless of what YOU say or do, Facebook will not be fooled. They will know exactly who you are and where you are, just by mining your friends, your IP address, etc. (I mean, seriously, you can't have imagined this would really work, did you)?

      Even if you never signed up for facebook, you are likely already in their database.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    6. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a thumbdrive that I keep on me most of the time with login info for about 250 fake accounts I log into from time to time on whatever device I'm near. Some of these accounts are friends with my real friends and some of which are only friends with 'each other'. A few of my friends also have fake accounts (though just one or two) so I think it'd be quite difficult to determine which accounts are real and which are fake. I don't really care about obfuscating my own tracks entirely, but I do hope that at some point in the future enough people create enough bs accounts to undermine the credibility of facebook's entire data set - effectively, if advertisers don't trust FB they won't pay as much for their services. That said, the number of pageviews isn't affected with this strategy so I'm probably wasting my time. It's still fun though.

    7. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      he could route it through tor then their ip records would be less than useless

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    8. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by houghi · · Score: 1

      Your name, most likely.

      I don't HAVE a facebook page. Good luck finding out what on my FB is real and what isn't.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No identifiable social network history is probably worse than a bad one already. What do you have to hide... so let's put you on a list.

    10. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't that trigger all the account protection flags that are set up?

    11. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I'd be shocked if you could log into Facebook through Tor, it's being treated as the Internet's leper colony these days, half the sites out there blacklist all exit node IPs.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    12. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the contact info from another user's address book. Your mom, your ex, your co-worker. They will all give a number (they now have your area code) so those data points are all trusted and added. Anything you are falsifying now is for your entertainment only.

    13. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      And its all for naught. They arent interested in ultimate accuracy. Even fake data points provide useful data. Your individual account is very much meaningless, but that fact that you participate at all says volumes to them.

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More likely he has been ripping off his employer daily!

    15. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I have a thumbdrive that I keep on me most of the time with login info for about 250 fake accounts I log into from time to time on whatever device I'm near. Some of these accounts are friends with my real friends and some of which are only friends with 'each other'. A few of my friends also have fake accounts (though just one or two) so I think it'd be quite difficult to determine which accounts are real and which are fake. I don't really care about obfuscating my own tracks entirely, but I do hope that at some point in the future enough people create enough bs accounts to undermine the credibility of facebook's entire data set - effectively, if advertisers don't trust FB they won't pay as much for their services. That said, the number of pageviews isn't affected with this strategy so I'm probably wasting my time. It's still fun though.

      Having seen presentations by people infiltrating facebook with bots, and other presntations by FB security outlining what they do to detect fakes, I think graph analysis would sort out what you're doing pretty quickly.

      A better idea would be to friend some people in India and pay them some small amount of money to involve you in all their activities (including photoshopped pics).

    16. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Facebook don't care. This graph search has already inferred and create a profile with most all the important information about you. And by not signing up you have let them just decide it was all true without your influence.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    17. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if you never signed up for facebook, you are likely already in their database.

      So we can meow: "I'm in their databazez, creating my profile."

    18. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then clearly not having any friends is the solution.

      Luckily, we the elite few here on /. have a lifetime of practice at this. Take that, Zuckerberg!

    19. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did the same things with friends list. I decided to accept anyone who wanted to friend me in order to dilute any type of associations people may try to make from the people on my friends list. My theory is that if I were friends with everyone on facebook, any analytics would be average.

    20. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, Facebook and social media is for dumb people. Why are people so obsessed with other peoples lives? If you spend just 10 minutes per day on that crap that equates to an hour a week and over 60 hours over a year you would have spare.

      Rather pick up a book and learn something and help reduce the number or dumb people in the world.

    21. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the most part, you cannot. I have something like twenty accounts and a quarter to a half are requesting phone number validation because I tried to log in from tor. My master account, which has always been tor'd has not been flagged. Go figure.

    22. Re:Garbage in, garbage out by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Tor + another proxy? Eventually you can go turtles all the way down...if you really want to.

  5. I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't use my real name.
    No one I work with is a "friend".
    No one from my hometown is a "friend".
    All of my info like birthdates, schools, etc, is bogus.
    I have hundreds of friends from underground subcultures, none with any official, family, or business connections.
    The majority of my hundreds of friends have bogus info, like me.
    My spouse and family are not marked as such on FB.
    There are no pictures of me that are not heavily obscured.

    So... FB may have info on Me, as "somebody", some entity, but if there really is almost no connection to a real person, I'm not very concerned.

    If you want your info private, don't put it on the Internet. It's as simple as that.

    1. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear anonymous coward,

      we already know who you are. You're an Internet retard who has way too much time on his hands. We're found and logged millions of posts in your name and we speculate you have more than 391 computers and an internet connection of more than 800Mbps to be able to post on so many websites at once.

      Signed,
      Anonymous Coward

    2. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      Too bad. They know exactly who you really are, and your current, (and probably all past) addresses. Your spouse and family log in from the same public facing IP addresses, you all visit the same restaurants together with your portable devices. Your friends have your pictures, and facial recognition will peg you.

      You are fooling no one but yourself.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by roscocoltran · · Score: 4, Informative

      Check how unique your browser is:
      http://panopticlick.eff.org/
      This will show you that logged in FB or not, your browser signs your unique presence for you. No really, you don't even need to have an account on FB to be known by FB. Now add the data collected by other sites and I'm quite sure that FB could automatically fill in your first name field and last name field for you during the account creation.

    4. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha ha ha!
      i have NO FRIENDS, i have NO "FAMILY LOG", i do not go to restaurants and i carry no portable devices.

      i am working on REMOVING THE FACE too.

      you will never get me, suckers.

    5. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by PRMan · · Score: 1

      He's on Slashdot. He's doesn't have friends or family IRL....

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    6. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I do none of this. I've got cyanogen on my phone and the data and GPS and course locational stuff is turned off unless I'm actually using it. It is certainly off in restaurants, because I'm not one of the douchbags who constantly checks his phone in social situations. No friends have ever posted pics of me or tagged me. Just like fingerprints, facial recognition can't work without a point of reference anyway.

      Take off the tinfoil hat. It's not as hard as you think to hide in obscurity. I actually work in the realm of security in some sense too, so I'm not totally dense when it comes to the subject. If the technology, means, and data simply doesn't exist to track information, it can't happen magically.

    7. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      Interesting link, thanks.

    8. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP was referring just to IP-based location, which is good enough for figuring out which city you are in.

    9. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the OP but none of the scenarios you describe are foolproof. I'm currently on shared internet with a bunch of people who have nothing to do with me. I don't use fb on my phone, and the facial recognition feature is a turd (at least when it tries to 'suggest' things to me). The biggest threat to individual privacy on the internet (apart from the looming police state, of course) is browser identification, and to me that seems like it shouldn't be big deal if someone can come up with a firefox plugin to spoof all that data and choose the most common set collected from panopticlick.

    10. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by icebike · · Score: 1

      Individually, those things you describe as "not foolproof" don't in fact have to be foolproof.
      Collectively, they are foolproof.

      Again, I urge you to RTFA completely.

      As of today, the capabilities of Graph Search probably won't hurt you.
      Unless you become a "person of interest" and the authorities start serving National Security letters and warrants on facebook for your account info. Then
      the sky is the limit, because all of those "not foolproof" things add up, and anything you mentioned in passing or your friends said or posted will be linked.
      So behave yourself, ya hear!?

      The TFA points out that this capability to link all of Facebook's mined data will be filtered into the API. Perhaps little by little at first. But, following facebooks normal mode of operation, paying customers will soon be able to know everything about you, not just the stuff you posted, but things the friends of your ex-girlfriend said about you.

      Ignore it as you wish. You sold your life to them, and they aren't going to forget anything about you.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    11. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by sphealey · · Score: 1

      = = = Unless you become a "person of interest" and the authorities start serving National Security letters and warrants on facebook for your account info. = = =

      It doesn't have to be national security: federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was famous for indicting girlfriends/boyfriends and fiancees of his targets on bogus federal charges regardless of their non-involvement in the target investigation, and threatening them with long jail sentences unless they testified as directed against their SO. He's since retired but that's probably a common tactic of all federal prosecutors, and access to Facebook will give them more of what they want in this area. Remember that plastic water bottle you dropped while hiking in a protected wilderness area? Oops.

      sPh

    12. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Except you miss that Facebook is not tracking the stuff you post... They are tracking the mundane stuff... The stuff you don't even use a username for. They are interested in marketing.. So what news do you read, they can tell a lot just from what you click and what you skip because all the "Like" buttons are "connected".

      Eventually your other "secret" life will be connected... But Facebook cares about what they can sell...Toothpaste, boxers, cheezy poofs, ect... So they are looking for demographic markers.. Boy/girl, black/white, 25/35/45, etc... All stuff pretty easy to gather from just collecting what you clicked for an hour.

    13. Re:I actually doubt FB can tell who I am. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      That really makes the point because I have a plain iPhone freshly updated to 6.1. Even though there is NOTHING about my specific iPhone listed (not leaking ID numbers) by the time they ping version numbers for all the user agent, media and web standards, and the various privacy options turned on or off, it was still 1 in 1 million .. Which means pretty easily tracked.

  6. Well, by no-body · · Score: 0

    this may be a solution while walking in public, let's say in a shopping mall and having your image on fazebook - 11 LED's.
    How it holds up in bright daylight will need to be seen.

    Privacy Protection Techniques Using Differences in Human and Device Sensitivity

  7. Yay, more content for Dice Holding's Slashdot.org! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be sure and spend lots of time posting something insightful since all this whole submission is meant to do is generate hits from search engines!

  8. So what by Kimomaru · · Score: 2

    Why on Earth would anyone post anything of value on Facebook? A few years ago whent the stories of Facebook's security and privacy concerns began to surface - THIS wasn't a clue? I honestly don't understand how this is news. People who didn't care about it years ago aren't going to care about their privacy now, and those who DO care fall into two categories; 1) They don't use Facebook at all 2) When they do, they post bogus information or omit information entirely because they don't trust the network. Soooooo, how is any of this news again?!

    1. Re:So what by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't think its their own posts most folks are worried about, or object to Facebook using,referencing,indexing etc.

      All but the dumbest among us (seems there are lots of really dumb folks though) know not to put anything on Facebook we'd be upset about someone reprinting on a billboard next to the interstate with attribution.

      The issue is really all the other photos people post and tag, the fact they can tag you when you don't even have an account. The fact that they are using facial recognition and what really are some pretty smart algorithms to know when someone mentions John Smith, just exactly which one they are talking about. Coupled with the location information attached to much of these things as meta data Facebook likely has a better idea of where you are at this very moment than many of our intelligence agency do and probably could figure it out faster too. That is what people have problems with.

      Now this search feature is going to make the last part more and more available to well anyone who happens to be interested and is willing to endure viewing an ad for "attractive singles in their area".

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:So what by Kimomaru · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I agree. It's a mess because, realistically, this is the only way FB can make money when they provide a "free" product. Personally, I think FB is a "tie-over" platform until someone does it properly, a system will eventually come along that's instead incentivised to protect user privacy.

    3. Re:So what by scottbomb · · Score: 1

      I also really couldn't care less. Thanks to the news media, people are way too paranoid about their personal information. If you don't go around giving out your SSN or bank account numbers, what difference does it make? I suppose if you're posting semi-nude pictures of yourself acting like a fool then you may want to reconsider what kinds of things you put on FB.

    4. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I also really couldn't care less. Thanks to the news media, people are way too paranoid about their personal information. If you don't go around giving out your SSN or bank account numbers, what difference does it make? I suppose if you're posting semi-nude pictures of yourself acting like a fool then you may want to reconsider what kinds of things you put on FB.

      Consider what happends when - yes, when - you or someone close to you, or even the company you work for, gets involved in a crime or lawsuit.
      When media and other enemies starts pulling your pictures from FB or other social media, posting them in another context.
      It happends all the time, and nobody sees it coming until it is too late.
      Just look at the poor guy who got his picture all over US media as a "crazy killer" but it turned out to be his brother who really pulled the trigger.

  9. Do not enter your real name on a social network. by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do not enter your real name on a social network, use a Psuedonym, call yourself something else like you would on IRC, AIM, YIM, etc. Only friend people who you know on their Psuedonym. People. Quit. Putting. Your. Real. Name. On. Accounts.

  10. Re:Yay, more content for Dice Holding's Slashdot.o by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

    Be sure and spend lots of time posting something insightful since all this whole submission is meant to do is generate hits from search engines!

  11. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And make sure your pseudonym is used by other people too. Otherwise its an even more unique identifier.

  12. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Jmc23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes people let us live in fear. Fear the bogeyman. Hide your truth. Isn't it obvious this is the path to a brighter future.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  13. time to declare war? by dave69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If a foreign government agency had spent years gathering data, and was mining it for undisclosed (possibly nefarious) purposes, It would be known as a dangerous spy network, would be subjected to infiltration/corruption and possible attack. I completely fail to understand why people tell FB anything about themselves ever, and don't request immediate deletion of all the data held about them. When governments try and spy on someone, they get all upset about it, when FB does it, and freely allows the data to be sold to the highest bidder/anyone who cares to look, people think its really cool and useful. what does it take for people to say enough is enough? Is it too late now, since the data is already gathered? why do I fail to see the upside of FB and its data gathering ilk?

    1. Re:time to declare war? by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      Consider the shareholders...

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    2. Re:time to declare war? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      If a foreign government agency had spent years gathering data, and was mining it for undisclosed (possibly nefarious) purposes, It would be known as a dangerous spy network, would be subjected to infiltration/corruption and possible attack.

      Doesn't every government have an agency that does that?

      What makes you think governments haven't infiltrated Facebook?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:time to declare war? by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      If a foreign government agency had spent years gathering data, and was mining it for undisclosed (possibly nefarious) purposes, It would be known as a dangerous spy network, would be subjected to infiltration/corruption and possible attack.

      Doesn't every government have an agency that does that?

      What makes you think governments haven't infiltrated Facebook?

      Infiltrated? Facebook happily cooperates with governments. No infiltration needed. Interestingly, that means that Facebook also has information on who all the governments think are interesting, and how they're related.

    4. Re:time to declare war? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      If a foreign government agency had spent years gathering data, and was mining it for undisclosed (possibly nefarious) purposes, It would be known as a dangerous spy network, would be subjected to infiltration/corruption and possible attack.

      Yes, because foreign government spy networks consist of putting up a webpage and saying "Hey, everyone, send us stuff you don't want people to know".

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    5. Re:time to declare war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing spy networks are incredibly predictable, dumb and contrained of resources so they'll never do something you won't expect! Even better is nothing can't serve multiple purposers or change purpose once started.

  14. Because..... by gelfling · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People who post pictures of themself drunk, passed out pants round their ankles in the street are concerned with privacy.

    1. Re:Because..... by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      People who post pictures of themself drunk, passed out pants round their ankles in the street are concerned with privacy.

      Report: Every Potential 2040 President Already Unelectable Due To Facebook

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    2. Re:Because..... by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      No, people who have others post pictures of them drunk passed out pants round their ankles in the street are concerned with privacy.
      You do not have to have a facebook account to be trackable to facebook. You just need to have friends who have facebook. Friends who do not care for your privacy, who will tag you in their posts.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  15. I was searching for pictures of their pets! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as Facebook doesn't publish which Friends-of-Friends' pictures I browsed for 20 minutes, I'll be fine...

  16. graph is a fucking nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God, I can be such a creep.
    graph is a FUCKING NIGHTMARE for privacy.

    Background: I've signed up for this dating site..
    I see a profile of someone who interests me, and being a nerd, I can figure out their last name, and find their facebook page..

    The really scary part? I plug into facebook graph
    Friends of "Interesting girl name" who are friends of my friends

    I got hits.. Two results

    J, D, S and R - friends of mine, and known to me, have a facebook friend who happen to be down as a friend of this person....
    One of the four is friends with both search results.

  17. do I exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have never had a FB account, real or fake. Although I have several friends that do, and they sometimes discuss things about me. I wonder how much FB know about me?

  18. So? by tgibbs · · Score: 2

    The anonymous ship sailed a long time ago for pretty much anybody who has ever done anything public under their own name. I could be easily googled well before FB came along. That doesn't particularly bother me; I don't have any mortal enemies that I'm hiding from, and I'd like any old friends to be able to find me if they want to do so. The rules haven't changed: if you really want to be private for some reason, don't do anything public (and anything on the internet is public) under your real name--for that matter, you might want to consider changing your name to something generic with 100,000 Google hits that aren't you.

    1. Re:So? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      More to the point, privacy is an illusion we create to hide us from ourselves. If you really want "privacy" then go hide in a cave all by yourself. If you want to keep secrets, don't tell anyone else. The moment you tell someone something you've lost control of that information. The internet just makes it easier to lose control of information.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:So? by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      If you want to keep secrets, don't tell anyone else.

      You don't need to tell anyone your secrets.

      Google will guess them from your browsing habits, and they will sell them.

      And some people tend to think that what you do at home is, well, your own business.

    3. Re:So? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Your browsing habits aren't a secret. You're telling each server you what you're browsing. As long as you browse the internet, it isn't really a secret. If you want to keep a secret, tell no one.

      What you do at home IS your business. The internet is not your home. If you want to keep your "private life" private, then don't let it escape from the confines of your house, cave, or mom's basement. Viewing porn on the internet means someone knows you are watching porn, and if you don't want others to know, then you've already lost that battle.

      If you want to watch porn, anonymously, then get a good disguise and go to the porn shop in the next couple towns over, pay cash and hope nobody recognizes you. Once that is done, watch it alone, and don't tell anyone.

      Anything else, is sacrificing privacy for convenience. But that isn't nearly as satisfying as instant access by typing "Lesbian Whores" or "gay anal sex" into Google, is it?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    4. Re:So? by sphealey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      = = = More to the point, privacy is an illusion we create to hide us from ourselves. If you really want "privacy" then go hide in a cave all by yourself. If you want to keep secrets, don't tell anyone else. The moment you tell someone something you've lost control of that information. The internet just makes it easier to lose control of information. = = =

      Try using your small business account to order up a Choicepoint profile of one Richard Cheney and see how far that theory takes you. If privacy is such an unimportant illusion why does every high-ranking corporate and government official have access to their records not only blocked but set up for immediate counterattack on access?

      sPh

    5. Re:So? by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      Anything else, is sacrificing privacy for convenience. But that isn't nearly as satisfying as instant access by typing "Lesbian Whores" or "gay anal sex" into Google, is it?

      You pick a nice example, that's cute.

      How about sending an email to your mother talking about your cancer treatment? Is email supposed to be private? I know you can intercept it, but is it fair to expect to talk about this without Google monetizing it by selling your info to a pharma company?

      Or should you lock up in your cave and die of cancer because if you get treatment, then everybody in the world MUST know about it?

    6. Re:So? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, back in the real world privacy means you can go clubbing on the weekend, get shitfaced and then go back to your boring office admin job on Monday and not get fired for something you didn't do at work because your boss looked up you personal life on the internet and the company you work for has decided how you should live your personal life.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    7. Re:So? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      THAT is a haves vs have-not problem. These aggregation guys will happily work for you... If you pay enough.

      Kind of like how you can't tag or search Mr Z on Facebook.. It somehow "forgets" him very well.

  19. You do not have a Facebook Page by AndrewStephens · · Score: 3

    I wrote this a while ago but I will continue to post it as long as stupid people exist: You Do Not Have A Facebook Page!. Facebook has a page on you.

    I signed up to Facebook and occasionally update Facebook's page on me, I find the service quite useful for keeping in touch with people, but I am under no illusions as to why Facebook provides this service. Anyone who uses Facebook with anything they expect to keep private has seriously misunderstood their relationship with the company.

    --
    sheep.horse - does not contain information on sheep or horses.
  20. let's not kid ourselves... by alienzed · · Score: 0

    privacy = dishonesty That isn't to say that all dishonesty is necessarily negative, but I challenge anyone to think of a single instance of "privacy" that isn't also "dishonest" if you assume that withholding the truth is also being dishonest. Sure, there are plenty of things that are none of anybody's business, but the indisputable fact is that we can't know what isn't anybody else's business, unless we know what it is first. I for one welcome our future computerized overlord that will decide what is and what isn't anybody's business without humans having to get involved. After all, those automatic toilet flushing devices have been watching you go for years now! What was this about? Privacy on Facebook? Who the hell publishes something on a public site design for sharing information and expects that information not to be shared. It's like people eat like pigs, never exercise and cry about being fat and out of shape. STFU.

    --
    Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
    1. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      but I challenge anyone to think of a single instance of "privacy" that isn't also "dishonest" if you assume that withholding the truth is also being dishonest.

      I challenge anyone who can think of a single instance of when the sun didn't come up in the west, assuming that "west" means "the direction the sun comes up in".

    2. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by pla · · Score: 1

      [...] if you assume that withholding the truth is also being dishonest

      9/10... Well played, sir!

    3. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so please post the amount of cash/valuables you have at home, and your work hours.

    4. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by vux984 · · Score: 1

      That isn't to say that all dishonesty is necessarily negative, but I challenge anyone to think of a single instance of "privacy" that isn't also "dishonest" if you assume that withholding the truth is also being dishonest.

      Why would I ever accept such an idiotic assumption.

      By your line of reasoning wearing underwear counts as "dishonest". Having your blinds closed is "dishonest". Peeing behind the bush instead of in front of it where i can see you is "dishonest". Keeping your bank PIN code a secret is "dishonest". Stubbing your toe and thinking "ouch" without saying it is "dishonest".

      GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK.

      Only a complete idiot would categorize any of that as dishonesty. Sure we can all agree that not telling your girlfriend that you banged the neighbor should count as dishonest as you've breached the implicit agreement that is likely in effect to be mutually faithful and then concealed this fact, but simply electing not to volunteer an estimate of how many ounces you urinated this morning is not "dishonesty" by any reasonable stretch.

    5. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      I think Mr. Alienzed was attempting a lowbrow flyby of sarcasm sprinkled with a dash of dickheadedness(aka Trolling)...

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    6. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Privacy = DEFENSE. The point is to limit your surface area vulnerable to attack, and it is ALWAYS under attack. Have you ever heard of Cardinal Richelieu?

      --
      Good-bye
    7. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      privacy = dishonesty

      Am I being dishonest because I don't tell my future employers exactly what I did with my girlfriend last night? Because really, the only people that need to know about that are me and her.

      Am I being dishonest because I don't tell the NSA exactly which completely legal political gatherings I'm attending? Because I should be able to do that without the NSA caring about it.

      I could go on, but I think you get the point.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    8. Re:let's not kid ourselves... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Per Meriam Webster : dishonest implies a willful perversion of truth in order to deceive, cheat, or defraud.

      You could argue that saying anything about a subject is dishonest but it seems only if this is an attempt to "deceive, cheat, or defraud." IMO, not telling Facebook something is not an attempt to deceive them and is definitely not cheating or defrauding them. Posting incorrect information is an attempt to deceive. But then, who is to argue that dishonesty is always bad?

  21. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Obfuscant · · Score: 1, Troll

    Yes people let us live in fear. Fear the bogeyman. Hide your truth. Isn't it obvious this is the path to a brighter future.

    Interestingly enough, I just did a global birth certificate search, and besides not finding one for a "Barrack Obama" in the US or any protectorate or territory thereof (which we all knew anyway), I did find one listing an official name of "Jmc23". Just "Jmc23". Parents listed as "Run Dmc" and "J-Lo".

  22. Don't use your real information, unless... by concealment · · Score: 1

    There is only one time when you use real information: when you're paying for a service and it has a vested interest in keeping your information off the open internet.

    Otherwise, it's time to fill in the B.S. Think of your best friend as a child, and a common object around the house. Those terms are your first name and last respectively.

    - Dave Paperweight

    1. Re:Don't use your real information, unless... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anita Dildo

      DOH!

  23. Yawn. by pla · · Score: 1

    0.0.0.0 connect.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 graph.facebook.com


    Or, just run Ghostery, which scrubs the whole lot of 'em. Anyone browsing the modern internet without at least an adblocker and a tracker/analytics blocker pretty much deserve what they get.

  24. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

    Are you saying that fear is the path to a brighter future?
    OR
    living in a dystopian FB/"We know what you think before you think it" future?

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  25. Why Should I Care? by Githaron · · Score: 1

    From my understanding, this new feature still pays attention to your privacy settings. If you don't have your privacy settings set right, that is your fault. If you don't think Facebook gives you enough control in its privacy settings, don't use Facebook. If you have a public Facebook profile with sensitive private information on it, you are an idiot and big companies have been aggravating your data for a while now.

  26. People just don't understand how info propagates by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    At first, I thought FaceBook users were a bunch of popularity whores looking for scores of friends and their own reality TV fix. Now, I simply think users just don't make the connection to a bunch of online connections and how quickly and easily their activity propagates to each other.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  27. The real problem by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real problem, As I see it, is that in the not too distant future:
    everyone in the US will essentially be forced to have a Social Network account to be able to function in modern society.

    More and more I see all manner of business and government entities handing responsibility over to FB for all sorts of things. It's actually quite disgusting, but not surprising given the (d)evolution of our database driven society. A centralized system of user accounts that almost everything done digitally can use?

    When I first saw the subtle changes taking place with FB, things like not being able to contact my local PBS television station unless I used FB , or not being able to enter a contest to see one of my favorite bands unless I used FB I knew it would be only a matter of time until everyone will be forced to have an account.

    Currently I don't have one, and never have. However I am part of a group that has an account, and my name and image are located there, so I'm "in the system" as it were.

    Once everyone is forced to have an account, then the next step will be for society in general to force those with accounts to update those accounts. There will come a time when via our smartphones those accounts will be updated automatically.
    It's almost at that point now:

    Who you've talked to.
    What you said.
    Where you went.
    What you bought.
    What you listened to.
    What you read.
    What you think.

    Disgusting, reprehensible, wrong

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    1. Re:The real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You have strange views on what constitutes force.

    2. Re:The real problem by jafac · · Score: 1

      In my case. . .
      FORCED? Really?
      And, all those things . . . none of it, terribly exciting to anybody.
      Seriously. There are 7+ billion of us on this planet. I'm not all that special. Exactly why the NSA would waste my tax dollars spying on me, I have no fucking idea.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    3. Re:The real problem by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Name one government agency that requires the use of Facebook.

    4. Re:The real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For someone with such a low /. ID you really have no fucking clue.

    5. Re:The real problem by heteromonomer · · Score: 1

      If there ever was an insightful comment on fb.. this is it.

    6. Re:The real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure it's wrong?

      This is the future. Nothing is private. We will have a generation that thinks this is normal.

      Nothing can really prevent this.

      It is only a matter of time.

    7. Re:The real problem by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      That's definitely the trend. The "where you've been" thing is a little creepy.

      I resisted joining FB for a long time. The ironic thing is that I'm a civil liberties activist, and FB just became too bloody useful for organizing people and scheduling events. Like you said, if you don't use it, you're definitely "out of the loop" on a lot of things. It's a conundrum. I don't like it, but you have to figure that anyone interested can already intercept your e-mail and phone calls, know about every hotel, airline or rental car agency you've used, track any online(or other CC/DC) purchases you've made, etc. Unless you want to give up all of those things too, I think you're already compromised.

      My rationale for using FB is that my political views and activities are already so widely known that anyone attempting to profile me must have had a complete dossier long before I joined. I'm involved in nothing illegal, so I'll be OK until the government begins its violent crackdown on peaceful political activists.

  28. Re:People just don't understand how info propagate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or they don't really care?

  29. 100 posts and nobody asked... by Qzukk · · Score: 1

    Is everyone really 6 degrees from Kevin Bacon?

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    1. Re:100 posts and nobody asked... by Pop69 · · Score: 1

      Who cares, I'm 3 degrees from Cameron Diaz !

  30. Think I'll post this ... by madonnell · · Score: 1

    ... on Facebook. HeHeHe .... HeHe .... He .. He .. hmmm???

  31. Re:People just don't understand how info propagate by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Think about how many times some moron has shared information about a crime they committed on Facebook. I think they care, but they don't understand how quickly information spreads.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  32. YARNTDFB by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

    Yet Another Reason Not To Do FaceBook.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  33. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    That defeats one of the most attractive features/purposes of Facebook ... the ability to locate (or be located) by old friends and connections you knew from school, previous jobs, etc.

    Don't forget, Facebook basically sprung up from the ashes of the old pay sites like Classmates.com. People were eager enough to locate each other using a site like this, they used to pay good money for memberships. Then Facebook came along and said they'd do the same thing at no cost.

    If you really don't want people to know anything about you, why would you ever use a site like Facebook in the first place? (The online games are really second-rate fare, so that's not even a very good reason, IMO.)

    I'm not denying there are very real, serious privacy implications to using social networking sites... and I'm just as certain there are govt. agencies heavily backing sites like Facebook as info-gathering tools for their own purposes. But I don't have a big problem with using it in a responsible manner. I understand I'm giving up some privacy by posting info on the site, but I'm selectively about what I offer there. Most of it, I don't consider a big deal for others to have. In fact, most content I put there is along the lines of sharing URLs to other pages of information -- so I'm just redirecting some traffic in those cases. Can they analyze that and learn some of my interests? Yup. Do I care? Nope.

  34. /. is infected with FB spyware too by futhermocker · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately I might add. There are OG tags all over the place and even see a FB icon next to a username sometimes. What's up with that?

    --
    KERNEL PANIC -SIGFAULT AT ADDRESS #51A54D07
    1. Re:/. is infected with FB spyware too by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I'm lucky. My employer has blocked everything facebook from all of their proxies, so I see nothing.

  35. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

    Great now everybody knows the reason for my big mouth and ass!

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  36. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

    You mean "Zombie Ryushu" is not your real name??

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
  37. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 1

    There are people, and friends of mine who use Facebook as their only means of Contact.

  38. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is sayin we have nothing to fear from the ignorant, prejudiced masses and the omniscient and omnipotent powers that be.

    Basically he is stating his commitment to remain an obedient and undisrupting conformist forever.

  39. Breaking News by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Website that your enter every minute detail of your life along with trackers on millions of websites to tie your browsing habits directly to your account has more personal information than one that passively collects your information through ads and search results.

  40. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by antdude · · Score: 1

    I did that a few years ago, but got kicked off after three weeks because of it. Hence, why I refuse to it, Google+, etc.

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  41. Three-letter agency by sphealey · · Score: 1

    I suspect that Facebook is being funded, if not operated, and at the least has certainly been heavily infiltrated by a US three-letter agency. NSA, CIA, NRO, one of those guys. The amount of information freely offered and the graph connections that have been growing since Day 1 are a staggering resource for spies. As would be a list of people who don't appear in the graphs.

    sPh

    1. Re:Three-letter agency by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      ...the graph connections that have been growing since Day 1 are a staggering resource for spies. As would be a list of people who don't appear in the graphs.

      If they have a list of people who aren't in the graph, and the graph, then don't they have, basically, a list of EVERYONE?

      You might as well join the graph, then, since they have you on a list anyway.

  42. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

    What part of "don't do written/verbal diarrhea on the internet" and "if you do so anyways, don't use your real name" is all about fear? I mean, part of me is happy about Facebook because it sort of proves the idea that if enough people engage in that sort of written diarrhea dumping every little bit of their life that it becomes such an annoying and boring waste that only a small handful of people (or maybe no one) will bother to follow, hence proving the idea that "the truth will set your free" and "information wants to be free" can be fulfilled.

    And then I look at how much (a) Facebook and others are profiting off of this using data mining and such and how nefariously it could all be used and (b) just how much it really isn't being ignored. Facebook started off as a sort of college social club with almost high school-like mentality. Its net result has been to include a lot more people back into that high school-like mentality--where probably through nothing else but isolation that sort of thing ended in high school and so social circles ended up being a lot smaller and of much more limited scope. Of course, perhaps I'd feel a whole lot better if "high school-like mentality" was a positive thing.

    --
    Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
  43. Re:Do not enter your real name on a social network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can back this statement as an AC.

    It's true. Too many people I know use Facebook as their primary means of communication.

    We have no more privacy. It doesn't exist anymore. You can find anything out about anyone with some effort. The only thing stopping that from happening is a restraining order on everyone you know.

    But that would leave your life very... dull, wouldn't it?

    Maybe we should embrace the fact that we can know everyone around us... and they know everything about you.

    It's hard for many out there that want to control every single bit of information about themselves. But as time passes, it will become even more impossible to hide.

  44. Yes, it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, hosts files are a valid and good way to block sites. It might not use wildcards, but it is only a single layer (Ghostery, Adblock Plus, NoScript, RequestPolicy, etc) that absolutely is effective.

    MVPS.org updates it's hosts file every month or so and is quite reliable. I would know since my job deals with network, database, and computer security very deeply on many different levels.

    Should it be the only way to stop tracking? Of course not. But to just out right dismiss it as being effective at all is laughable. There are tens of thousands of known domains that, once removed, add another effective layer of security.

    That's like saying you shouldn't use any anti-virus at all since it is a known fact that anti-virus can't catch 80% of the new malware out there. http://www.zdnet.com/eighty-percent-of-new-malware-defeats-antivirus-1139263949/

    Are you sure you don't work for an ad company?

  45. Just use Adblock Plus plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And use the filters you mention.

    Adblock Plus really IS an awesome method, and dirt simple to use.
    Remember to uncheck "Show unobtrusive ads" in the settings.

    If anything gets through, you can open up the Adblock Plus dialog and then choose that to be discarded.

    While you're at it, filter out the g+ icons too...

  46. And people sneerewd at me for eschewing FB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People thought I was crazy to abstain from FB. Then after FB sponsored a series of articles intended to flush out anyone still not getting with the program, by suggesting that anyone who does not use FB may be someone you need to worry about, people started wondering if I was some kind of criminal. Who's laughing now? You'll be rejected for that job / promotion / position / venture capital / loan and do you know why? No, you won't because *your not FB's customer- FB's customer is the organization it sells extremely detailed dossiers about your social / political / sexual activity to*, who then decides, based on that dossier, that you're not who they're looking for.

    Have a nice life, FB sheeple. Believe me when I say that the "anonymous, aggregate data" FB admits it sells is about as anonymous as a fingerprint after about 30 seconds worth of statistical data mining. And that's just what they admit to, not what they reserve as a right to sell, at their sole discretion after they've unilaterally "updated and amended" their "privacy policy".

    Corporations exist to make money for their shareholders. When will people ever learn what that really means. Only your collective will expressed through your government can limit what corporations do to you. Other than that, the sky's the limit. Either you'll pressure your Congressfuck to give you the power to completely delete all your information - at your sole discretion - from online services like FB nor you can spend the rest of your life being profiled right into a ghetto.