Facebook confirms Cambridge Analytica stole its data; it’s a plot, claims former director

50 million profiles leaked and ‘politically weaponized’ against US voters

It’s not a data breach - it’s a feature

On Saturday morning Facebook updated its statement on the matter with the following missive:

The claim that this is a data breach is completely false. Aleksandr Kogan requested and gained access to information from users who chose to sign up to his app, and everyone involved gave their consent. People knowingly provided their information, no systems were infiltrated, and no passwords or sensitive pieces of information were stolen or hacked.

On social media the company's head of security Alex Stamos has been taking to Twitter to make the same point. He pointed out that users now have controls in their privacy settings to block just this kind of data slurping. However, he has now deleted those tweets.

According to Tiffany Li, research fellow at Yale and the Wikimedia/Yale Law School Initiative on Intermediaries and Information, Facebook might be liable in the courts but appears to be positioning itself as a wronged party in the affair.

“Facebook alluded to fraud in the statement and they could be implying that they were defrauded, and that either the academic or Cambridge Analytica misrepresented itself to Facebook,” she told The Register.

“Facebook itself may have some liability. There are contractual agreements in its privacy policy, but it faces the possibility of Federal Trade Commission enforcement if found to be seriously at fault.”

People in Facebook familiar with the matter told The Register that the company’s primary concern is that this is a matter of a researcher misusing data fraudulently. All options in whether to take further action against those involved are being considered.

The case may, however, have longer-term implications for how States regulate data within their borders, Li said. It was clear that technology companies are trying to be more responsible with their data, but new legislation is needed, since we’re largely still operating under laws written pre-internet.


Mr Wylie’s extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and so far we only have his word.

The usefulness of Cambridge Analytica’s technology has been called into question by academics who say its ability to pinpoint voters is in question. There’s also the question of CA’s record.

If the company's targeting and propaganda arm is so powerful then why isn’t the company an international kingmaker? Presidential hopeful Senator Ted Cruz hired the firm to improve his image and Nix reportedly bragged that Cambridge Analytica had turned “one of the less-popular” candidates into the “second-most threatening contender.”

But he still lost, and lost big time. That may be a bad metric because Cruz is loathed by many in his own party, but Cambridge Analytica should be being bought into by every political party in the world if it can swing over voters as effectively as has been claimed.

Cambridge Analytica did work for Trump in the last five months or so of his campaign. Whether or not they had an effect is hard to tell. Facebook’s own research shows that its feeds can affect people’s emotions, but can it do the same for voting patterns?

But does it have an effect? Almost certainly - all successful firms like this, from Palantir on down, sell services like this and people wouldn’t pay for them if they didn’t work. We all have a responsibility to be skeptical about what social media is feeding us.

Facebook and Cambridge Analytica will certainly be under the microscope. The Massachusetts Attorney General has announced the state will hold an investigation into the matter immediately.

There’s also the Robert Mueller investigation to consider. He has reportedly already had contact with Cambridge Analytica, and the former FBI boss will be looking to get to the bottom of such things.

But it's likely that a copy, or copies, of the archive is still out there, given that Facebook demands nothing more than a pinky swear from those responsible that they really did delete it. Finding such a data trove would put Cambridge Analytica in very hot water indeed.

Incidentally, if you want to know what data Cambridge Analytica has on you then finding out is simple. Under UK data protection laws the company has to tell you what it has on its servers and you simply have to ask for it. There are more details here and feel free to get in touch if anything interesting pops up. ®

Similar topics

Other stories you might like

  • Prisons transcribe private phone calls with inmates using speech-to-text AI

    Plus: A drug designed by machine learning algorithms to treat liver disease reaches human clinical trials and more

    In brief Prisons around the US are installing AI speech-to-text models to automatically transcribe conversations with inmates during their phone calls.

    A series of contracts and emails from eight different states revealed how Verus, an AI application developed by LEO Technologies and based on a speech-to-text system offered by Amazon, was used to eavesdrop on prisoners’ phone calls.

    In a sales pitch, LEO’s CEO James Sexton told officials working for a jail in Cook County, Illinois, that one of its customers in Calhoun County, Alabama, uses the software to protect prisons from getting sued, according to an investigation by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

    Continue reading
  • Battlefield 2042: Please don't be the death knell of the franchise, please don't be the death knell of the franchise

    Another terrible launch, but DICE is already working on improvements

    The RPG Greetings, traveller, and welcome back to The Register Plays Games, our monthly gaming column. Since the last edition on New World, we hit level cap and the "endgame". Around this time, item duping exploits became rife and every attempt Amazon Games made to fix it just broke something else. The post-level 60 "watermark" system for gear drops is also infuriating and tedious, but not something we were able to address in the column. So bear these things in mind if you were ever tempted. On that note, it's time to look at another newly released shit show – Battlefield 2042.

    I wanted to love Battlefield 2042, I really did. After the bum note of the first-person shooter (FPS) franchise's return to Second World War theatres with Battlefield V (2018), I stupidly assumed the next entry from EA-owned Swedish developer DICE would be a return to form. I was wrong.

    The multiplayer military FPS market is dominated by two forces: Activision's Call of Duty (COD) series and EA's Battlefield. Fans of each franchise are loyal to the point of zealotry with little crossover between player bases. Here's where I stand: COD jumped the shark with Modern Warfare 2 in 2009. It's flip-flopped from WW2 to present-day combat and back again, tried sci-fi, and even the Battle Royale trend with the free-to-play Call of Duty: Warzone (2020), which has been thoroughly ruined by hackers and developer inaction.

    Continue reading
  • American diplomats' iPhones reportedly compromised by NSO Group intrusion software

    Reuters claims nine State Department employees outside the US had their devices hacked

    The Apple iPhones of at least nine US State Department officials were compromised by an unidentified entity using NSO Group's Pegasus spyware, according to a report published Friday by Reuters.

    NSO Group in an email to The Register said it has blocked an unnamed customers' access to its system upon receiving an inquiry about the incident but has yet to confirm whether its software was involved.

    "Once the inquiry was received, and before any investigation under our compliance policy, we have decided to immediately terminate relevant customers’ access to the system, due to the severity of the allegations," an NSO spokesperson told The Register in an email. "To this point, we haven’t received any information nor the phone numbers, nor any indication that NSO’s tools were used in this case."

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021