Facebook sued over illegal collection of user data
A class action suit has been filed against Meta, claiming that Facebook and Instagram iOS apps circumvented App Tracking Transparency in order to illegally continue tracking users without permission.
Mark Zuckerberg
Since iOS 14, Apple's App Tracking Transparency (ATT) requires apps to cease tracking users unless that user explicitly allows them to continue. Facebook has famously objected to ATT, and revealed that it has had an impact of more than $10 billion on its projected earnings.
According to Bloomberg, however, a proposed new class-action lawsuit claims that Facebook and Instagram owner Meta has been circumventing ATT and collecting data, regardless of user preferences and opt-out.
The suit, filed in San Francisco federal court, is based on research from data privacy researcher, and former Google engineer, Felix Krause. He claims that Facebook and Instagram inject JavaScript code into websites visited by users.
Krause says that this JavaScript code allows Meta to track "anything you do on any website." That goes further than the regular advertising tracking, and even theoretically includes the ability to capture passwords typed into sites.
The suit further alleges that Facebook opens web links in its own in-app browser, rather than using Safari or whatever the user's default browser is.
"This allows Meta to intercept, monitor and record its users' interactions and communications with third parties," says the suit. In doing so the suit also says that it also that data collected to boost advertising revenue, contrary to user preference.
Meta has not commented publicly on the suit. However, Krause's report says that the company acknowledged that it monitors browser activity, but denied the accusation of illegal data collection.
The two cases at the core of the class action filing are Willis v. Meta Platforms Inc., 22-cv-05376, and Mitchell v. Meta Platforms Inc., 22-cv-05267, both filed in the US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).
Read on AppleInsider
Mark Zuckerberg
Since iOS 14, Apple's App Tracking Transparency (ATT) requires apps to cease tracking users unless that user explicitly allows them to continue. Facebook has famously objected to ATT, and revealed that it has had an impact of more than $10 billion on its projected earnings.
According to Bloomberg, however, a proposed new class-action lawsuit claims that Facebook and Instagram owner Meta has been circumventing ATT and collecting data, regardless of user preferences and opt-out.
The suit, filed in San Francisco federal court, is based on research from data privacy researcher, and former Google engineer, Felix Krause. He claims that Facebook and Instagram inject JavaScript code into websites visited by users.
Krause says that this JavaScript code allows Meta to track "anything you do on any website." That goes further than the regular advertising tracking, and even theoretically includes the ability to capture passwords typed into sites.
The suit further alleges that Facebook opens web links in its own in-app browser, rather than using Safari or whatever the user's default browser is.
"This allows Meta to intercept, monitor and record its users' interactions and communications with third parties," says the suit. In doing so the suit also says that it also that data collected to boost advertising revenue, contrary to user preference.
Meta has not commented publicly on the suit. However, Krause's report says that the company acknowledged that it monitors browser activity, but denied the accusation of illegal data collection.
The two cases at the core of the class action filing are Willis v. Meta Platforms Inc., 22-cv-05376, and Mitchell v. Meta Platforms Inc., 22-cv-05267, both filed in the US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
Tried to delete them on my iMac.
Still allowed these.
In the US, the Federal Trade Commission can go after a company for violating their own posted policies as "unfair and deceptive acts and practices" even if the privacy information didn't have other specific legal protection.
The law is the FTC Act, see Section 5. federal-trade-commission-act
What we have here is Facebook refusing to abide by Apple’s rules in Apple’s house. What should be done here is that Apple throws Facebook out of its house for failing to respect Apple’s house rules. There is no need to get the legal system involved in any way, shape, or form. At least in theory and in terms of basic human respect, common courtesy, and dignity.
I have been asking about recent macOS prefs in a similar light, especially Siri privacy with the seemingly buried ML 'Learn from this App' default to on and now (12.6?) an added setting to 'Show Siri Suggestions in App'...?
While Mr Cook makes seemingly carefully worded statements about 3rd party privacy and direct data sales, should we be concerned about a Siri data or machine learning market strategy (even if 'anonymized') seemingly in collecting so much 'Learning' without a front and center request...?
Is CoreML worth a deep dive Apple/FB/Google/Twitter data mining comparison ?
I am reminded of www.googleandtheworldbrain.com/ and ask if this is the Apple World Brain equivalent...?
'Learn from this App' were all set to on after a recent migration, without as I recall any obvious request or warning, even when Siri was turned off and all data deleted from iCloud also selected...?
Apple and Microsoft don’t need to sell you to make money, your relationship with them is to buy actual goods from them, our government local/state/federal doesn’t want to enforce the few laws that are on the books (they do fight hard for corporations however), so someone has to take the non violent non riot work within the system approach thru the courts.
From: www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/02/facebook-google-data-change-our-behaviour-democracy
"Data ownership is an individual solution when collective solutions are required. We will never own those 6m predictions produced each second. Surveillance capitalists know this. Clegg knows this. That is why they can tolerate discussions of “data ownership” and publicly invite privacy regulation."
On and unrestricted by default putting the onus on the user(s) experience to turn such off manually vs globally, perhaps akin to Photos auto indexing which has no opt out... Should this be on by default or on an opt in basis only and include a global off setting for apps...?