Home > Insights > Blogs 

CA Community

This Blog

Facebook's Changes - Good But Not Yet Enough

Published: December 06 2007, 05:06 PM
by Stefan Berteau

 

Yesterday, Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg issued an apology via his blog, and announced major changes to the Beacon system, effective immediately.  These changes are good news, and go a long way to address privacy concerns, including statements that they immediately delete information which is sent in from users who are logged out or who have not opted in.  Despite these actions, however, significant issues remain.  Facebook has not yet placed this statement in a binding privacy policy, and could therefore alter their policy with regard to this data at any time, without being required to notify its users.  We have been informed that Facebook will be revealing an updated privacy policy later tonight, and we will be looking at that when it becomes available.  As long as data about user activities are being sent in to Facebook, then users need a binding commitment as to how it will be handled, and until such a commitment is in place, their privacy will remain at risk.

 

The following statement was posted to the Facebook Blog at 7:00am Wednesday, December 5:

 

About a month ago, we released a new feature called Beacon to try to help people share information with their friends about things they do on the web. We've made a lot of mistakes building this feature, but we've made even more with how we've handled them. We simply did a bad job with this release, and I apologize for it. While I am disappointed with our mistakes, we appreciate all the feedback we have received from our users. I'd like to discuss what we have learned and how we have improved Beacon.

 

When we first thought of Beacon, our goal was to build a simple product to let people share information across sites with their friends. It had to be lightweight so it wouldn't get in people's way as they browsed the web, but also clear enough so people would be able to easily control what they shared. We were excited about Beacon because we believe a lot of information people want to share isn't on Facebook, and if we found the right balance, Beacon would give people an easy and controlled way to share more of that information with their friends.

 

But we missed the right balance. At first we tried to make it very lightweight so people wouldn't have to touch it for it to work. The problem with our initial approach of making it an opt-out system instead of opt-in was that if someone forgot to decline to share something, Beacon still went ahead and shared it with their friends. It took us too long after people started contacting us to change the product so that users had to explicitly approve what they wanted to share. Instead of acting quickly, we took too long to decide on the right solution. I'm not proud of the way we've handled this situation and I know we can do better.

 

Facebook has succeeded so far in part because it gives people control over what and how they share information. This is what makes Facebook a good utility, and in order to be a good feature, Beacon also needs to do the same. People need to be able to explicitly choose what they share, and they need to be able to turn Beacon off completely if they don't want to use it.

 

This has been the philosophy behind our recent changes. Last week we changed Beacon to be an opt-in system, and today we're releasing a privacy control to turn off Beacon completely. You can find it here. If you select that you don't want to share some Beacon actions or if you turn off Beacon, then Facebook won't store those actions even when partners send them to Facebook.

 

On behalf of everyone working at Facebook, I want to thank you for your feedback on Beacon over the past several weeks and hope that this new privacy control addresses any remaining issues we've heard about from you.

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

 

Mark

 

This statement reflects some very positive things, and announces some steps which are in line with what we had hoped to see.  They are taking this issue seriously and have made changes.  Overall, it reinforces the impression that Facebook did not set out to do a bad thing, but rather did a thing badly.  Furthermore, they are starting to take action to address the risks posed by Beacon, and while they have not yet mitigated them they have taken some very important steps.

 

So what has changed?  There are two major changes introduced yesterday: the addition of a universal opt-out from Beacon, and the placement of a statement about the silent transmission of data in their Help section.

 

The universal opt-out feature has been added just below the individual site settings on the "Privacy Settings for External Websites" page.  Our tests indicate that it overrides individual site settings, so that a universal opt out means that no sites will be able to post stories to your profile, or even present the dialog box.  This results in Facebook erring on the side of opt-out when ambiguity is present, and represents a major improvement over the previous controls offered.

 

Facebook also updated its Actions From External Websites pages, and now discloses the transmission of this data.  Their statement, which says that data received about users who are not logged in is not associated with an account and is deleted immediately, is in their "Help" section under "Actions from External Websites".  The statement becomes visible when the seventh item is expanded.

 

As stated above, these are good changes, and the universal opt-out in particular addresses our biggest concern about the user interface.  Not everything that we were concerned about has changed, however.

 

First, there is no change in the data being sent to Facebook unbeknownst to the average user.  Data is sent silently from affiliate sites and with no indication to the user at time of transmission - whether users are logged in, logged out, or have never even opened an account with Facebook.   In the case of users of affiliate sites who do not have a Facebook account, the data is effectively anonymous, but for many Facebook users the data comes with their Facebook user ID, allowing it to be tied directly to their account.  The newly offered global opt-out does not prevent this data's being sent to Facebook.

 

Second, as of this writing, there has been no change to the Facebook privacy policy since September 12, 2007, according to Facebook's privacy policy.  Facebook has made statements and posted a help page explaining its policy on the silently transmitted data it receives, but the privacy policy remains unchanged.  We expect to see an update to the privacy policy tonight, however, and remain hopeful that it will address the privacy risks currently posed by Beacon.

 

Third, while visiting affiliate sites, there is no mechanism to indicate to users that data is being transmitted to Facebook.  We did a survey of privacy policies for BlockBuster, Kongregate, Sony, Bluefly, STA Travel, TripAdvisor and Travel Ticker.  None of them make any specific mention of Facebook or the data which gets transmitted. 

 

As a result of these three aspects remaining unchanged, several of our concerns continue, and users of Facebook and Beacon affiliate sites still face a threat to their privacy.  The silent transmission of data about actions on third-party websites to Facebook poses a serious risk, and must be mitigated by both prominent notice to the user, and a binding commitment on Facebook's part to handle the data properly.  

 

What Facebook has provided is something which is commonly termed "discoverable notice".  Actions From External Websites is not a section of the website which is visited during the course of creating a Facebook account or modifying your Beacon settings.  Users wouldn't even find it under the help section labeled "Privacy and Security".  Even if users do visit the page, the statement about data being deleted is hidden unless they click to expand the sixth bulleted item.  The data being sent to Facebook represents a significant enough threat to user privacy that users cannot be expected to dig through the site looking for notice of the transmissions.  They must be actively notified by information which is prominently displayed.  Notice that data will be transmitted to Facebook even when users are logged out or have opted out should be visible on the "External Websites" section of the user privacy controls.  As it currently stands, the Facebook website is not adequately informing users that it is receiving data about their off-site activities.

 

Beyond active notice, mitigation of the threat posed by this data requires a binding commitment on the part of Facebook to handle the data properly.  Facebook and its users agree to use the site in accordance with the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.  Only these documents are binding on the parties, so adding a statement to the FAQ or Help section, without more changes elsewhere, would have little to no effect on the users' rights.  Furthermore, Facebook has to notify end-users of any material changes to its Privacy Policy and give them 30 days prior notification of such changes by email or on the Facebook home page or Privacy Policy site.  All changes must be posted on the Privacy Policy change, along with their effective date.  Thus, if Facebook is willing to commit to the deletion of data for end-users who opt out of the Beacon advertising program, it should appear as a change to their Privacy Policy.  As previously mentioned, we are waiting for the release of their updated privacy policy, and will be evaluating that when it becomes public.  We remain hopeful that it will contain a commitment to the deletion of such data, because without that language users are simply required to trust that this voluntary policy will not be changed.

 

Finally, the affiliate sites have a responsibility to their own users to inform them that certain actions will result in Facebook receiving information, even if they do not have a Facebook account.  For users without a Facebook account, this information is anonymous, and therefore discoverable notice in the affiliate's privacy policy would be adequate.  To date, however, none of the affiliates we have checked provide explicit mention of their data transfer to Facebook.

 

 

Share this post:  EmailEmail

By: Stefan Berteau
Stefan Berteau is a senior research engineer with CA's Anti-Spyware Research team. He holds a B.S. in Multimedia Design and Development from American University, where his studies concentrated on machine learning and graphics programming. Stefan's research-related interests include automated...
Read More..

2 people have left comments:

Under European Data Protection laws, the affiliate sites are almost certainly breaking the law in transmitting this data to Facebook for users with a Facebook account, as the information can be linked to the user.

As for users without a Facebook account, the data is NOT completely anonymous as it is transmitted via the user's browser connecting to Facebook.  This will leave the user's IP address in the logs at Facebook, which can be used in many cases to identify the user.

Posted by: Alan Peery | December 10, 2007 4:43 AM

Wait a minute! Do you mean to tell me that when I buy movie tickets at Fandango they give that information to Facebook even though I'm not a Facebook user? That's intrusive! Fandango says, "Fandango may transfer the Personally Identifiable Information it collects to any affiliates (including our parent company, Comcast Corporation and its affiliates), trusted business partners or joint venturers, or successors in interest to Fandango..."

The privacy thing used to be really just about getting emails, having your email or name and address info sold to be used to solicit you. Now it has moved to another level, selling your behavior data. Big Brother gets a job in the private sector!

Hey, what are *you* doing with this information? Get away from my IP address... Is CA any better? From CA's privacy policy: "We may also disclose the information [it has collected about you on the website] to our business partners, for marketing and other purposes which we believe may be beneficial to you." I'm going to click the "Don't remember me" box. Wait, where is it? ...

Posted by: Dave Britton | December 11, 2007 7:26 AM

 
 
Page Tools