FFacebook Gave Device Makers Deep Access to Data on Users and Friends. Contradicts Testimony to congress?
Facebook Gave Device Makers Deep Access to Data on Users
and Friends
The company formed data-sharing partnerships with Apple,
Samsung and
dozens of other device makers, raising new concerns about
its privacy protections.
By GABRIEL J.X. DANCE, NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and MICHAEL
LaFORGIA JUNE 3, 2018
As Facebook sought to become the world’s dominant social
media service, it struck agreements allowing phone and other device makers
access to vast amounts of its users’ personal information.
Facebook has reached data-sharing partnerships with at
least 60 device makers — including Apple, Amazon, BlackBerry, Microsoft and Samsung
— over the last decade, starting before Facebook apps were widely available on
smartphones, company officials said. The deals allowed Facebook to expand its
reach and let device makers offer customers popular features of the social
network, such as messaging, “like” buttons and address books.
But the partnerships, whose scope has not previously been
reported, raise concerns about the company’s privacy protections and compliance
with a 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission. Facebook allowed
the device companies access to the data of users’ friends without their
explicit consent, even after declaring that it would no longer share such
information with outsiders. Some device makers could retrieve personal
information even from users’ friends who believed they had barred any sharing,
The New York Times found.
Most of the partnerships remain in effect, though
Facebook began winding them down in April. The company came under intensifying
scrutiny by lawmakers and regulators after news reports in March that a
political consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, misused the private information
of tens of millions of Facebook users.
In the furor that followed, Facebook’s leaders said that
the kind of access exploited by Cambridge in 2014 was cut off by the next year,
when Facebook prohibited developers from collecting information from users’
friends. But the company officials did not disclose that Facebook had exempted
the makers of cellphones, tablets and other hardware from such restrictions.
“You might think that Facebook or the device manufacturer
is trustworthy,” said Serge Egelman, a privacy researcher at the University of
California, Berkeley, who studies the security of mobile apps. “But the problem
is that as more and more data is collected on the device — and if it can be
accessed by apps on the device — it creates serious privacy and security
risks.”
In interviews, Facebook officials defended the data
sharing as consistent with its privacy policies, the F.T.C. agreement and
pledges to users. They said its partnerships were governed by contracts that
strictly limited use of the data, including any stored on partners’ servers.
The officials added that they knew of no cases where the information had been
misused.
The company views its device partners as extensions of
Facebook, serving its more than two billion users, the officials said.
“These partnerships work very differently from the way in
which app developers use our platform,” said Ime Archibong, a Facebook vice
president. Unlike developers that provide games and services to Facebook users,
the device partners can use Facebook data only to provide versions of “the
Facebook experience,” the officials said.
Some device partners can retrieve Facebook users’
relationship status, religion, political leaning and upcoming events, among
other data. Tests by The Times showed that the partners requested and received
data in the same way other third parties did.
Facebook’s view that the device makers are not outsiders
lets the partners go even further, The Times found: They can obtain data about
a user’s Facebook friends, even those who have denied Facebook permission to
share information with any third parties.
In interviews, several former Facebook software engineers
and security experts said they were surprised at the ability to override
sharing restrictions.
“It’s like having door locks installed, only to find out
that the locksmith also gave keys to all of his friends so they can come in and
rifle through your stuff without having to ask you for permission,” said Ashkan
Soltani, a research and privacy consultant who formerly served as the F.T.C.’s
chief technologist.
Michael LaForgia, a New York Times reporter, used the Hub
app on a BlackBerry Z10 to log into Facebook.
After connecting to Facebook, the BlackBerry Hub app was
able to retrieve detailed data on 556 of Mr. LaForgia's friends, including
relationship status, religious and political leanings and events they planned
to attend. Facebook has said that it cut off third parties' access to this type
of information in 2015, but that it does not consider BlackBerry a third party
in this case.
The Hub app was also able to access information —
including unique identifiers — on 294,258 friends of Mr. LaForgia's friends.
Details of Facebook’s partnerships have emerged amid a
reckoning in Silicon Valley over the volume of personal information collected
on the internet and monetized by the tech industry. The pervasive collection of
data, while largely unregulated in the United States, has come under growing
criticism from elected officials at home and overseas and provoked concern
among consumers about how freely their information is shared.
In a tense appearance before Congress in March,
Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, emphasized what he said was a
company priority for Facebook users.“Every piece of content that you share on
Facebook you own,” he testified. ”You have complete control over who sees it
and how you share it.”
But the device partnerships provoked discussion even
within Facebook as early as 2012, according to Sandy Parakilas, who at the time
led third-party advertising and privacy compliance for Facebook’s platform.
“This was flagged internally as a privacy issue,” said
Mr. Parakilas, who left Facebook that year and has recently emerged as a harsh
critic of the company. “It is shocking that this practice may still continue
six years later, and it appears to contradict Facebook’s testimony to Congress
that all friend permissions were disabled.”
The partnerships were briefly mentioned in documents
submitted to German lawmakers investigating the social media giant’s privacy
practices and released by Facebook in mid-May. But Facebook provided the
lawmakers with the name of only one partner — BlackBerry, maker of the
once-ubiquitous mobile device — and little information about how the agreements
worked.
The submission followed testimony by Joel Kaplan,
Facebook’s vice president for global public policy, during a closed-door German
parliamentary hearing in April. Elisabeth Winkelmeier-Becker, one of the
lawmakers who questioned Mr. Kaplan, said in an interview that she believed the
data partnerships disclosed by Facebook violated users’ privacy rights.
“What we have been trying to determine is whether Facebook
has knowingly handed over user data elsewhere without explicit consent,” Ms.
Winkelmeier-Becker said. “I would never have imagined that this might even be
happening secretly via deals with device makers. BlackBerry users seem to have
been turned into data dealers, unknowingly and unwillingly.”
In interviews with The Times, Facebook identified other
partners: Apple and Samsung, the world’s two biggest smartphone makers, and
Amazon, which sells tablets.
An Apple spokesman said the company relied on private
access to Facebook data for features that enabled users to post photos to the
social network without opening the Facebook app, among other things. Apple said
its phones no longer had such access to Facebook as of last September.
Samsung declined to respond to questions about whether it
had any data-sharing partnerships with Facebook. Amazon also declined to
respond to questions.
Usher Lieberman, a BlackBerry spokesman, said in a
statement that the company used Facebook data only to give its own customers
access to their Facebook networks and messages. Mr. Lieberman said that the
company “did not collect or mine the Facebook data of our customers,” adding
that “BlackBerry has always been in the business of protecting, not monetizing,
customer data.”
Microsoft entered a partnership with Facebook in 2008
that allowed Microsoft-powered devices to do things like add contacts and
friends and receive notifications, according to a spokesman. He added that the
data was stored locally on the phone and was not synced to Microsoft’s servers.
Facebook acknowledged that some partners did store users’
data — including friends’ data — on their own servers. A Facebook official said
that regardless of where the data was kept, it was governed by strict
agreements between the companies.
“I am dumbfounded by the attitude that anybody in
Facebook’s corporate office would think allowing third parties access to data
would be a good idea,” said Henning Schulzrinne, a computer science professor
at Columbia University who specializes in network security and mobile systems.
The Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed how loosely
Facebook had policed the bustling ecosystem of developers building apps on its
platform. They ranged from well-known players like Zynga, the maker of the
FarmVille game, to smaller ones, like a Cambridge contractor who used a quiz
taken by about 300,000 Facebook users to gain access to the profiles of as many
as 87 million of their friends.
Those developers relied on Facebook’s public data
channels, known as application programming interfaces, or APIs. But starting in
2007, the company also established private data channels for device
manufacturers.
At the time, mobile phones were less powerful, and
relatively few of them could run stand-alone Facebook apps like those now common
on smartphones. The company continued to build new private APIs for device
makers through 2014, spreading user data through tens of millions of mobile
devices, game consoles, televisions and other systems outside Facebook’s direct
control.
Facebook began moving to wind down the partnerships in
April, after assessing its privacy and data practices in the wake of the
Cambridge Analytica scandal. Mr. Archibong said the company had concluded that
the partnerships were no longer needed to serve Facebook users. About 22 of
them have been shut down.
The broad access Facebook provided to device makers
raises questions about its compliance with a 2011 consent decree with the
F.T.C.
The decree barred Facebook from overriding users’ privacy
settings without first getting explicit consent. That agreement stemmed from an
investigation that found Facebook had allowed app developers and other third
parties to collect personal details about users’ friends, even when those
friends had asked that their information remain private.
After the Cambridge Analytica revelations, the F.T.C.
began an investigation into whether Facebook’s continued sharing of data after
2011 violated the decree, potentially exposing the company to fines.
Facebook officials said the private data channels did not
violate the decree because the company viewed its hardware partners as “service
providers,” akin to a cloud computing service paid to store Facebook data or a
company contracted to process credit card transactions. According to the consent
decree, Facebook does not need to seek additional permission to share friend
data with service providers.
“These contracts and partnerships are entirely consistent
with Facebook’s F.T.C. consent decree,” Mr. Archibong, the Facebook official,
said.
But Jessica Rich, a former F.T.C. official who helped
lead the commission’s earlier Facebook investigation, disagreed with that
assessment.
“Under Facebook’s interpretation, the exception swallows
the rule,” said Ms. Rich, now with the Consumers Union. “They could argue that
any sharing of data with third parties is part of the Facebook experience. And
this is not at all how the public interpreted their 2014 announcement that they
would limit third-party app access to friend data.”
To test one partner’s access to Facebook’s private data
channels, The Times used a reporter’s Facebook account — with about 550 friends
— and a 2013 BlackBerry device, monitoring what data the device requested and
received. (More recent BlackBerry devices, which run Google’s Android operating
system, do not use the same private channels, BlackBerry officials said.)
Immediately after the reporter connected the device to
his Facebook account, it requested some of his profile data, including user ID,
name, picture, “about” information, location, email and cellphone number. The
device then retrieved the reporter’s private messages and the responses to
them, along with the name and user ID of each person with whom he was
communicating.
The data flowed to a BlackBerry app known as the Hub,
which was designed to let BlackBerry users view all of their messages and
social media accounts in one place.
The Hub also requested — and received — data that
Facebook’s policy appears to prohibit. Since 2015, Facebook has said that apps
can request only the names of friends using the same app. But the BlackBerry
app had access to all of the reporter’s Facebook friends and, for most of them,
returned information such as user ID, birthday, work and education history and
whether they were currently online.
The BlackBerry device was also able to retrieve
identifying information for nearly 295,000 Facebook users. Most of them were
second-degree Facebook friends of the reporter, or friends of friends.
In all, Facebook empowers BlackBerry devices to access
more than 50 types of information about users and their friends, The Times
found.
Katrin Bennhold contributed reporting.
Comments
Post a Comment