Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Exposes Employee Data To Terrorists (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader writes: The Guardian is reporting that Facebook accidentally exposed the personal information of the moderators that remove terrorist content to the groups that posted that very content. From the article it looks like 6 of them actually had their profiles viewed. From the article, "The security lapse affected more than 1,000 workers across 22 departments at Facebook who used the company's moderation software to review and remove inappropriate content from the platform, including sexual material, hate speech and terrorist propaganda."

What are Facebook's responsibilities here?


50 comments

  1. responsibilities? by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    we don't need no stinking responsibilities.

    1. Re: responsibilities? by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      facebook = everyones business is everyones business.

    2. Re:responsibilities? by XXongo · · Score: 0
      No question Facebook screwed up badly, exposing the identity of its employees to potential terrorists.

      It is worth keeping in mind, though, that ultimately the real culprits here are the terrorists.

    3. Re:responsibilities? by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

      That is just racist. You are not respecting the piece loving, genital mutilating, mass murderers. Off to sensitivity training for you!

      --
      "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  2. Whoops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahaha Facebook is scum!

  3. Facebook fully liable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In my opinion, as Facebook opened these persons to such a risk, they should assume full and complete liability for anything that comes from it.

    1. Re:Facebook fully liable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the risk that they opened, they need to do something akin to putting them into witness protection. Yes, they aren't the government so it can't be exactly the same. But they need to be moved, names changed - and they need a chunk of change for their trouble.

    2. Re:Facebook fully liable by Kergan · · Score: 1

      That liability won't be worth squat for the people involved if they get killed.

  4. Witness protection maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd say Facebook might want to look into changing the identities of these people that were exposed. I honestly would be a little scared right now if somebody I was censoring now knew my personal information.

    1. Re:Witness protection maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're stupid enough to have an account there I doubt they're capable of caring.

  5. Ensuring Their Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To relocate all those folks via a witness protection like program

    1. Re:Ensuring Their Safety by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Funny

      "We're sorry we published your name, censoring duty and home address to the Goat Bladder Knitting and IED Club. Please click here to enroll in three free months of credit monitoring..."

    2. Re:Ensuring Their Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We've also improved our privacy options. Uncheck here if you do not want terrorists to be unable to not view your personal details.

    3. Re: Ensuring Their Safety by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 1

      I'm looking, but there's no N$A option either. Is there something else I'm supposed to sign up for? Download? *Panics* DO MY APPS AND API NOT PLEASE YOU MA' LORDSHIP?!!! "100 Hail Micro$ofts and be on your way pleb!" Mark makes a Z motion in the air with his hand.

  6. To enrichen shareholders by satisfying clients. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is a business. Its clients are sponsors. Its users are the products. The terrorists are just one of billions of products sold to sponsors.

    So its responsibility here is to optimise the targeting of advertising relevant to terrorists and supporters of terrorism so as to maximise click-thru and conversion.

    Anything else is just people fantasising about Facebook being some sort of public forum.

  7. How much will it take? by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How much will it take for people to finally get a clue about how bad Facebook is?

    1. Re:How much will it take? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much will it take for people to finally get a clue about how bad Facebook is?

      I guess 300 likes and one amen

    2. Re:How much will it take? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering other corporations are even worse, what is the point of fighting back? The Republicans have destroyed our lives and now rule nearly every moment of our lives.

    3. Re:How much will it take? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that Zuckerberg is a Democrat right?

    4. Re:How much will it take? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Considering other corporations are even worse, what is the point of fighting back?

      You don't need to "fight back", and other corporations are irrelevant. Facebook is a non-essential service which provides nothing of value. It's just like having a cable TV package, for example (or worse, a package with ESPN). The simple solution is to stop using it and do something better with your time.

      Facebook is not an essential utility/service like your water/sewer service, electricity, or even internet service. It's no more useful or essential than playing Flappy Birds on your phone.

    5. Re:How much will it take? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are stupid.

      Yeah that pretty much sums it up.

      Until it affects them, people will ignore the problem. People don't like admitting that they are wrong, anyone else who gets impacted "its their fault they must have done something wrong", so they carry on as usual, however when they get impacted its not their fault (i.e. they were not wrong), the company screwed them over.

      So for most people, all they are waiting for is the ability to blame someone else for their ignorance.

  8. Rats! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ratting people out to the NSA is bad enough. But now, ratting them out to terrorists? Wow, that's a new low. And they were even doing a service that supposedly makes Facebook better, for members and investors.

    Ugh.

    Maybe they're just trying to one-up Uber.

    1. Re:Rats! by computational+super · · Score: 2

      trying to one-up Uber

      Modern western civilization has taught me that you can get away with absolutely anything as long as you make sure to keep appeasing feminists. Keep that one rule in mind, and you're teflon.

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    2. Re:Rats! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NSA, terrorists, it's all the same. They all want us to be scared.

    3. Re:Rats! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont see the difference, they're both oppressive terrorist regimes to me

  9. That's right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They are one of the three biggest advertising companies on Earth (Google and Yahoo! being one and three respectively) and they are rich and above the law.

    See, corporations are people until it comes to criminal prosecution. "Oh, we'll fine them millions! And they just let the stockholders eat it (Ahahahahahah) and the stock goes up because they got off with just the cost of a month's worth of toilet paper.

  10. Don't Worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    User data has been exposed already for years now

  11. Strange Policy by mfh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find it utterly strange that the same profiles that a moderator would use in their official duties would be somehow linked to their own Facebook profile. That seems to me like a huge security oversight. Paid mods should ALWAYS have separate credentials from their own personal stuff. What happens when FB fires someone? They just change their FB acct to non-admin? Seems like a huge problem if there are any rollbacks.

    No. You gotta keep shit separated. I get that most forums around typically associate user accts with privs... but that's bad policy if your system is going to be targeted. Better to have secret hidden mod accts that can be audited internally but do not show up externally... and can't be accessed remotely. Remote mod accts should have extra layers of auditing and security as well.

    I'm probably preaching to the choir, but FB never seemed like a very talented company, or at best their amoral practices will always be to their disadvantage, as we see here.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:Strange Policy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You gotta keep shit separated.

      I thought you're supposed to get your shit together?

    2. Re:Strange Policy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They probably don't want use time thinking about these things. It would take away minutes from being all creative and doing cool stuff.

    3. Re:Strange Policy by swillden · · Score: 1

      I find it utterly strange that the same profiles that a moderator would use in their official duties would be somehow linked to their own Facebook profile. That seems to me like a huge security oversight.

      I'll bet they were linked to their corporate profile, which likely also doubles as the employee directory entry. As such, it probably didn't have truly personal details, like home address or personal phone number, which would only be in HR systems and wouldn't be exposed to other employees. But it would have their complete name, and office location (city), and other tidbits that might be usable to identify them IRL.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  12. The real problem here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is that the employees even had a personal Facebook account to begin with instead of an Employees Only type of account that doesn't have any personal info on them.

  13. TOS Update by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's now prohibited under Facebook's Terms of Service to kill, maim, or place a hit on any member of Facebook's staff.

    Violators are subject to having their accounts suspended or deleted without notice.

  14. Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ask Kathy Griffin.

    Who is Seth Rich?

  15. Too Big to Be Held Responsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is too big to be held responsible for any harm this case of reckless endangerment may cause, at least in the USA. Perhaps, if any European employees were endangered, there will be some EU agency investigating the matter, but then heaps of butthurt Yanks will whine about how those filthy Eurocommies dare demand that a Holy Corporation abide by the law.

  16. To be expected by evolutionary · · Score: 2

    This is what happens when a large amount of something valuable is available from one convenient location. when are people going to stop sending sensitive data to these guys. They send our data to various state police department (and probably federal+ groups as well) who are reportedly using that data for a face recognition system deemed illegal in two states (and the police don't seem to care the state laws make it's use illegal), marketing companies, and probably anyone who will pay Facebook enough. There is no real privacy on Facebook as it was never a priority. When are we all going to learn.

    --
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
  17. Relocate and new ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would be a start.

  18. Easy civil action by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    This seems an easy civil action. Fault from Facebook is obvious and documented, damages are huge. That should attract a lot of lawyers.

  19. Mark Zuckerberg, Friend To Islam Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mark Zuckerberg is an avowed friend and supporter of Islam terrorists, a hater of Legal USA Citizens and an enemy of the United States of America.

    Facebook is just a tool for Muslim and Islam terror operations world wide.

    1. Re:Mark Zuckerberg, Friend To Islam Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummmmm, you know he's Jewish, don't you?

  20. Terrorists? by bongey · · Score: 1

    The FBI?

  21. What planet do you live on exactly? by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Americans have Democratic policies everywhere. From ACA which most American's didn't want to "Sanctuary" Cities and States which ignore and fight against Federal Law and the US Constitution. Gun-Free Zones are a product of Democratic control, Democrats push back against school choice, and have propagated SJWs, BLM, antifa, and other groups who behave both violently and criminally.

    Most of us on the R side just want to be left the f&*k alone and want Government to be minimized. Pretty much what we are supposed to be guaranteed in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The far left believes that Government can solve all of our problems and should be pervasive.

    Lets not forget that the Democratic party wanted slavery and fought a Civil war over it. The Democratic Party voted for Jim Crow laws, and still promotes identity politics and tribalism. The first Republican President fought to rid the US of slavery, and the Republican Party voted to end discrimination, tests for voting, and voted fpr racial equality in the 60s. And before you talk about the "bit switch", that do some homework and find out that it was exactly 1 person who changed sides.

    You are living in a delusional lie if you believe all your problems are from Republicans.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:What planet do you live on exactly? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Please don't insult our intelligence by comparing today's elephant posse with the party of Lincoln.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    2. Re: What planet do you live on exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans just want to be left alone..

      Except for women, who shouldn't be able to make their own medical decisions.

      Or gays or straight who like butt stuff. The State has an obligation to criminalize that for some reason.

      Or hermaphrodites, because where they take a piss is suuuuuper important to national defense interests.

      Oh and drugs other than tobacco and alcohol. Because people shouldn't get high from weed they grow on their farm. Dry in their barn and smoke in their home. Because reasons.

      And I'm not even interested in that stuff. Republican economic policies are even more absurd.

    3. Re: What planet do you live on exactly? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Republicans just want to be left alone..

      Except for women, who shouldn't be able to make their own medical decisions.

      Completely asinine framing of the Abortion debate. Not that you could debate the subject with any degree of intelligence, but there are some good papers and debates out there in case a drive by reads your idiocy. Hint: There is a human growing inside a woman during pregnancy.

      Or gays or straight who like butt stuff. The State has an obligation to criminalize that for some reason.

      Well, 2 for 2 in attempting to minimize complex issues to a single asinine point. Republicans in general don't care about sexual preferences. The debate has been over much more complex issues, such as as person wanting to force another person to act against their Religious beliefs in a private business. There are also some interesting points regarding adoption, health care, etc.. etc...

      Or hermaphrodites, because where they take a piss is suuuuuper important to national defense interests.

      Well, 3 out of 3 times so far you have demonstrated you lack any intellect at all. Are you seriously attempting to claim all transvestites/transexuals are hermaphrodites? Perhaps your claim is that instead of who really was demanding to let men who dress as women for any reason into the woman's rest room, it was just a few innocent hermaphrodites? In either case you are wrong! Why not listen to an actual transvestite on the subject and find "Blaire White".

      Oh and drugs other than tobacco and alcohol. Because people shouldn't get high from weed they grow on their farm. Dry in their barn and smoke in their home. Because reasons.

      And I'm not even interested in that stuff. Republican economic policies are even more absurd.

      Well, you just explained your lack of brain cells and lack of ability to debate complex topics at even a junior high school level. Sure, you don't worry about weed (which is why you mentioned it) *wink wink*. Go back to your bong.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    4. Re:What planet do you live on exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... far left believes that Government can solve all of our problems ...

      Since the USA doesn't have a far left, I don't see your point: Unless you believe the drivel spouted by Republican fanatics claiming it does.

      ... States which ignore and fight against Federal Law ...

      But only Republicans "want Government to be minimized": Got it! Since the US government encroaches upon state rights the most, this is something both sides of US politics should be complaining about. The dictatorship the federal branch imposes over the states only makes government more broken. The "united" in USA does not mean there's a federal level of government: It means, or it should mean, the states all choose the same rules. Yes, with 50 voices making the rules, it will be difficult; which is why the federal government was established, to keep everything brief, on-topic and for 'the good of the people'.

  22. "Because terrorists" by munch117 · · Score: 1

    So, judging by the comments so far, all you have to do is say "terrorists", and then all of slashdot becomes a fan of faceless, unaccountable censorship.

    Let's all join hands and create a world where content is filtered by the anonymous minions of a few megacorporations, and you absolutely do not have the right to face your accuser, challenge the decision, or even know the rules by which you are being judged.

  23. Ironic, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The company that excels at collecting personal information for the sole purpose of disseminating that personal information is for some reason embarrassed that the personal information of its employees somehow leaked out while at the same time not feeling bad at all that everybody's personal information is bought and sold like cattle.

  24. Facebook has NO responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know somebody who works for a gov't security agency whose FB account got taken over by an Egyptian hacking group.

    Numerous reports to FB were met with essentially a "looks like it's all fixed now" form letter, and their article on what to do if your account is hacked fails the CRC check (on the "my account is hacked" section, it just links back to the page you're already on).

    The have no proper way to contact in case of any major issue, be it terrorism, hacking, suicide, illegal sales or whatever. All you get is form letters.