Facebook: 'We should've been more clear' on face-scanning tech

Tries to downplay stealth roll-out


Facebook has tried to prevent yet another privacy row engulfing the social network by admitting it "should have been more clear" about the roll-out of its facial recognition technology.

The company also posted an updated blog post explaining that its Tag Suggestions function had been switched on by default for the majority of its users.

"When we announced this feature last December, we explained that we would test it, listen to feedback and iterate before rolling it out more broadly," said a Facebook spokeswoman.

"We should have been more clear with people during the roll-out process when this became available to them. Tag Suggestions are now available in most countries and we'll post further updates to our blog over time."

But that only came after The Register and presumably other publications questioned why Facebook hadn't informed its users that the tech was being folded into their accounts, stealth fashion.

As we reported yesterday, security guru Graham Cluley first spotted that Facebook had applied its facial recognition tech to more of its accounts, without notifying its users.

The company started testing the tech in December when it introduced facial recognition to its Stateside users.

At that point, Facebook at least had the courtesy to pen a blog post explaining the new function, which somewhat creepily scans existing photos in a given account, then looks at photos in other accounts, before suggesting to individuals to "tag" their "friends" accordingly.

However, as Cluley noted yesterday, Facebook chose the "opt out" rather than "opt in" method of adding the tech. That decision, plus the lack of a blog post detailing the roll-out, meant that many users of the network were unwittingly exposed to Mark Zuckerberg's face-scanning tech.

"We launched Tag Suggestions to help people add tags of their friends in photos: something that's currently done more than 100 million times a day," said the Facebook spokeswoman.

"Tag Suggestions are only made to people when they add new photos to the site, and only friends are suggested. If for any reason someone doesn't want their name to be suggested, they can disable the feature in their Privacy Settings," she added.

The Facebook spokeswoman also batted away suggestions that the company's users' privacy was being eroded due to the "opt out" nature of the facial recognition function. She said "existing privacy settings" were always respected. ®

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • Consultant plays Metaverse MythBuster. Here's why they're wrong
    Holograms, brands, NFTs, and a 1,000-consumer survey

    Opinion Consulting giant McKinsey & Company has been playing a round of MythBusters: Metaverse Edition.

    Though its origins lie in the 1992 sci-fi novel Snow Crash, the metaverse has been heavily talked about in business circles as if it's a real thing over the last year or so, peaking with Facebook's Earth-shattering rebrand to Meta in October 2021.

    The metaverse, in all but name, is already here and has been for some time in the realm of online video games. However, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's vision of it is not.

    Continue reading
  • Behind Big Tech's big privacy heist: Deliberate obfuscation
    You opted out, but you didn't uncheck the box on page 24, so your data's ours...

    Opinion "We value your privacy," say the pop-ups. Better believe it. That privacy, or rather taking it away, is worth half a trillion dollars a year to big tech and the rest of the digital advertising industry. That's around a third of a percent of global GDP, give or take wars and plagues. 

    You might expect such riches to be jealously guarded. Look at what those who "value your privacy" are doing to stop laws protecting it, what happens when a good law  gets through, and what they try to do to close it down afterwards. 

    The best result for big tech is if laws are absent or useless. The latest survey of big tech lobbying in the US reveals a flotilla of nearly 500 salespeople/lawyers touring the US state legislatures, trying to either draw up tech friendly legislation to insert into privacy bills, water then down through persuasion, or just keep them off the books.

    Continue reading
  • Facebook phishing campaign nets millions in IDs and cash
    Hundreds of millions of stolen credentials and a cool $59 million

    An ongoing phishing campaign targeting Facebook users may have already netted hundreds of millions of credentials and a claimed $59 million, and it's only getting bigger.

    Identified by security researchers at phishing prevention company Pixm in late 2021, the campaign has only been running since the final quarter of last year, but has already proven incredibly successful. Just one landing page - out of around 400 Pixm found - got 2.7 million visitors in 2021, and has already tricked 8.5 million viewers into visiting it in 2022. 

    The flow of this phishing campaign isn't unique: Like many others targeting users on social media, the attack comes as a link sent via DM from a compromised account. That link performs a series of redirects, often through malvertising pages to rack up views and clicks, ultimately landing on a fake Facebook login page. That page, in turn, takes the victim to advert landing pages that generate additional revenue for the campaign's organizers. 

    Continue reading
  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022