Interview done and dusted. Really interesting topic this morning. I did some digging and found out that reportedly last year there were 18.5m reports of sexual abuse worldwide and 12m can be traced back to Facebook Messenger.
In 2018, Facebook made 16.8 million reports of child sexual exploitation and abuse content to the US National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, which the National Crime Agency estimates have led to more than 2,500 arrests bbc.co.uk/news/technolog…
So the concerns about Facebook's 'the future is private' campaign, using end-to-end encryption would stand in the way of this reporting process significant and potentially remove much of the responsibility from Facebook to report is valid in my opinion...
However, the PR move that "Facebook cares about your privacy" should be hugely criticised, primarily because the future, past and present of Facebook has entire business model built on the absolute opposite of privacy...
Secondly, this is a corrective PR measure to a very real security issue, these corrective measures are surface level, soundbites that sound cute but ultimately mean very little in the grand scheme of protecting users in actuality. It's just swapping risks/threats around
Finally, Facebook is talking about privacy but ultimately tracks your behaviour, your internet use on and off of Facebook (inc. Facebook Pixel) and uses this information to sell advertising space. MOST users don't know or understand the technology they're using to do this.
Ultimately, when it comes to the data - access between the UK Gov/Police and demanding access to SNS private messaging content, if the current process is slow or not working, review, adjust andfix the process. Not throw the whole system out
Especially, don't make a move towards violating all users privacy. It isn't just easy access to individuals personal messages, it's making an entire service used by 1.3b users vulnerable. Better processes, better systems, better training, better infrastructure - all needed.
Better regulations and reviews should certainly be done prior to even discussing this access, to ensure access isn't going to be abused and user's personal messages aren't exposed in the next data breach. Current users should also be able to control and be made aware of options..
To delete their personal messages off of the platform in their entirity, otherwise will just cause another issue later down the line about making users aware of what they're opting into/out of.
In summary, as @Snowden has recently said, what the UK government wants to achieve is the biggest over-night mass violation of privacy.
What Facebook wants is for you to forget they left 419m records on unsecured server,
independent.co.uk/life-style/gad…
What Facebook wants is for you to forget they left 419m records on unsecured server,
independent.co.uk/life-style/gad…
@Snowden That it just suspended over 400 apps that use Facebook data to be reviewed under privacy concerns after cambridge analytica
bbc.co.uk/news/technolog…
bbc.co.uk/news/technolog…
@Snowden That they never built in a "Clear all history" function because they didn't want it to be an option for users. It's still in dev apparently.
theguardian.com/technology/201…
theguardian.com/technology/201…
@Snowden That it freely provided access to an estimated 87 million profiles.
theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
@Snowden And an entire array of security issues, literally too many to go into.
They've been building features for years that encourage you to share more and more of your personal data, putting users at risk and doing little to nothing to educate in the grand scheme of things.
They've been building features for years that encourage you to share more and more of your personal data, putting users at risk and doing little to nothing to educate in the grand scheme of things.
@Snowden But sure...
End-to-end encryption is "Facebook caring about your privacy".
It's one thing, on a list of issues and it's just swapping one risk for another.
End-to-end encryption is "Facebook caring about your privacy".
It's one thing, on a list of issues and it's just swapping one risk for another.
@Snowden In my opinion, neither of these issues have had enough time, energy, research, manpower, infrastructure, design or thought behind them.
They don't give a jack about users safety or users privacy.
They care about politics and PR.
They don't give a jack about users safety or users privacy.
They care about politics and PR.
