How Facebook Outs Sex Workers (gizmodo.com) 635
An anonymous reader shares a Gizmodo report: Leila has two identities, but Facebook is only supposed to know about one of them. Leila is a sex worker. She goes to great lengths to keep separate identities for ordinary life and for sex work, to avoid stigma, arrest, professional blowback, or clients who might be stalkers (or worse). Her "real identity" -- the public one, who lives in California, uses an academic email address, and posts about politics -- joined Facebook in 2011. Her sex-work identity is not on the social network at all; for it, she uses a different email address, a different phone number, and a different name. Yet earlier this year, looking at Facebook's "People You May Know" recommendations, Leila (a name I'm using in place of either of the names she uses) was shocked to see some of her regular sex-work clients. Despite the fact that she'd only given Facebook information from her vanilla identity, the company had somehow discerned her real-world connection to these people -- and, even more horrifyingly, her account was potentially being presented to them as a friend suggestion too, outing her regular identity to them. Because Facebook insists on concealing the methods and data it uses to link one user to another, Leila is not able to find out how the network exposed her or take steps to prevent it from happening again. "We're living in an age where you can weaponize personal information against people"Kashmir Hill, the reporter who wrote the above story, a few weeks ago shared another similar incident.
The real problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
criminalizing prostitution.
Re:The real problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
No.
The real problem is that privacy rules are not protected by jail terms for company directors.
Re:The real problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Both are real problems.
Re:The real problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
analyzing and publishing public information is not an invasion of privacy, even when done on a massive detailed scale using new technology.
facebook is a public place, created to exploit user information for facebook investors' advantage, with no privacy whatsoever, don't use it. don't put yourself at the mercy of exploiters running facebook, if you care for privacy.
case would be different when non facebook users are exploited by zuck and gang, that too happens. that should be criminalized with prison. .
Re: (Score:3)
analyzing and publishing public information is not an invasion of privacy, even when done on a massive detailed scale using new technology.
True but isn't annoying to have to go deep-cover using CIA/FSB level tradecraft to avoid blow-back from a weekend night of sophomoric high inks? God help you if your undercover law enforcement or WitSec! I'm sure FB could easily be hit with interfering with a police officer even if a privacy charge can't beleveled.
Re: (Score:3)
How so?
Quantity matters. If you look at me at the street. It's not a problem. If you follow me 24/7 everywhere anytime I put a foot in a public space, it is a problem.
Re:The real problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Both are pretty serious problems and ones that massively would benefit society if changed. Of course that would require people to a) get over religion and b) get over the quasi-religious belief that people with a lot of money are somehow "good".
The left is more complex than you think (Score:3)
Many on the left would love to decriminalize sex work. I think if you look at opinion-pieces on this, you'll find virtually everyone for legalization to be either a libertarian or a liberal.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And there you have swallowed the "Big Lie" whole. The thing is that almost no sex worker is ever "trafficked". That is just a story vomited out by the anti-sex-work propaganda. No matter how often repeated, it is simply not true. It does however fit nicely into the deranged fantasies of many religious fundamentalists. The most extreme perversion committed by the police here is that they do charge sex-workers with having trafficked themselves. They also charge drivers (usually in the employ of an escort, i.e
Re: The real problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
OK, funny how you omitted all evidence for your statements. On purpose?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
But even if prostitution was legal and socially acceptable, don't you still think there would be prostitutes that would want to keep their day job hidden from family members or others?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe decriminalizing being a prostitute, while criminalizing being a John? I'm open to ideas.
A source (there are other news articles, and the study is out there somewhere as well): https://journa [journalistsresource.org]
Re: The real problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
A big issue here though is that the right-wing viewpoint is usually "This is forbidden! We will NEVER change that!".
If prostitution were regulated, with mandatory heath examinations, licensing of facilities and a framework that prevents these women from taken advantage of, we could have it both ways: People who want to pay for sex would be able to, with less risk to themselves and their "partner".
A good fictional example is the Companion Guild in the Firefly TV series. In that world they solved the problem through regulation and also elevating the trade so that it's considered prestigious, rather than scandalous.
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't it already legal in Nevada?
I have no idea how the locals see it or what regulation there is but wouldn't that be a place to look at what works and what doesn't?
Re: (Score:3)
Prostitution is legal in most countries.
And in the majourity of those countries, mandatory health checks and of course 'paying your taxes' are in those 'frameworks'
The legal system of the US, regarding prostitution, drugs and firearms is just 200 behind the civilized world.
Re: (Score:3)
A good fictional example is the Companion Guild in the Firefly TV series. In that world they solved the problem through regulation and also elevating the trade so that it's considered prestigious, rather than scandalous.
That, or virtually any real life brothel in Nevada.
Re: The real problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
Having multiple sexual partners messes with people's minds. We have a need to pair up.
Citation needed. Lots of pre-industrial societies did not have monogamous relationships as the norm. Lots of people today do just fine without restricting themselves to a single partner. The only real reason to push monogamy and marriage is as an attempt to create a stable environment for children to grow up in, and even that doesn't work well because raising kids is a lot of work; it worked out better for parents when they had help from extended family, something you don't see so much now which is why we have "day care" and babysitters. People who aren't having kids, or have gotten past that age (e.g. their kids have grown up and moved out) really have no good reason to stay in monogamous relationships. It's just something society pushes on us because of old-fashioned and obsolete morality and religion.
Re: The real problem is (Score:5, Interesting)
Kind of.
As a self-identified right-winger, my first concern with prostitution is the inherent risk of abuse, first due to the social stigma, which puts the sex worker at risk of abuse by law enforcement, pimps and other rent-seekers, and clients. Removing the stigma is, or should be, out of scope for government intervention. Government can reflect society and culture, but when it is used to dictate or shape society or culture, it is no longer freedom, and our nation has become something it was not intended to be.
This is why, as described in a recent incident, police officers defending engaging in sex with anyone other than their spouses (or partner) while on duty as innocuous are flat-out lying. Being a police officer, on duty, they have an inescapable position of authority, and there can be no consensual interaction with any citizen without the obvious risk of becoming an enforced interaction. The gun on their person forces that. Even taking the gun and badge off solves nothing, however, because they can defer that forced interaction until 'later'. A police officer on duty, and probably even off duty, can use their position of authority to force others to comply with virtually any demand, and their only risk is not exposure, for we see too many reports of this happening, but the unfortunately rare imposition of undesirable consequences. these happen too rarely to be a deterrent on many forces...
And this is only the law enforcement risk to sex workers. their clients can take advantage of a real imbalance of power. Until society removes the various stigma associated with the work, this is a risk where the work is held in such low esteem.
Now, the question of whether prostitution is a moral or ethical profession is one to be left to the culture and society. resolving that could make the work safer.
Re: The real problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm... as a self-identified left-winger; I'd say you nailed my position more or less perfectly as well. So I'm not sure the split her is left vs right at all.
I do generally favor legalization; for practical reasons. It is going to happen whether its legal or not, and they are already in a highly vulnerable occupation at the best of times... explicitly making them criminals too just makes them more vulnerable.
Dude, talking about getting it completely wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
The criminalization of prostitution doesn't fix any of those negative aspects. Decriminalization allows us to tax it. When we tax something we keep records and make requirements/offer services to the workers in that industry. Those requirements/services would be aimed at reducing the issues you're speaking of above. There will still be illegal prostitution, but legalization would greatly diminish that.
Prohibition didn't solve the evils of alcohol, they exacerbated them. The war on drugs hasn't stopped drug us, it's simply exacerbated the negative affect it had on society.
The first-order vs. higher-order stuff you're prattling about above is not directly connected with party affiliation. Stupid people only think about first-order affects. There are stupid people on either end of the spectrum.
Meanwhile, please point me to one member of congress presenting a "proper solution that provides far more balance and tries to avoid unintended side effects" for the ills of sex workers and their clients. By which I mean a solution other than "more prison, bigger guns."
Re: (Score:3)
Dude, the whole EU is lefty-society. All the Nordic countries are way lefty.
You're pointing to dictatorships and saying that's the left.
Re:The real problem is (Score:5, Informative)
Close. The real problem is carrying a cell phone with the Facebook app on it, signed in with your account, while doing things you don't want Facebook knowing about. All they have to do is correlate the GPS locations from multiple devices to detect that two people are repeatedly in the same location at the same time.
Re:The real problem is (Score:4, Informative)
Facial Recognition (Score:3, Insightful)
This is probably due to someone posting a photo with both people in it. Facebook will use facial recognition on photos, and when it sees two people in the same photo, I would expect it to suggest a connection.
Re:Facial Recognition (Score:5, Insightful)
AC, because I moderated already.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly I think I know a number of men who would pay to be filmed in some staged sex act. All it takes is one. And of course he's going to put it online.
Re: (Score:3)
People filming themselves having sex and then posting it online? That's unpossible.
If that existed, how could you possibly sell porn, there'd be pages where you can watch people shag for free.
Re: (Score:3)
It could be a non-sexual photo of the two together. It could even be some unrelated person who took a picture where the two are seen in the background. It could also be that Facebook is lying and they are using location data or data gathered from contacts or other apps. Of course, it's not like anyone should need this reason to avoid the Facebook apps and just use the web browser.
Re: (Score:3)
PUNISH PEOPLE I DON'T APPROVE OF (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Somehow I doubt this, unless this particular user happened to have a photo snapped with an acquaintance of a client...
Ultimately, Facebook is predicated on connections, and avoiding connections is in direct opposition to their business model. Good luck circumventing that. Even my LinkedIn account regularly gets unexpected and essentially random connections presented to me, especially for my work email which I inherited from a now departed employee who gets a lot of alumni-connected referrals from a universi
Re: (Score:3)
I think Facebook also uses location information essentially tracking your movements and suggesting people that you cross paths with on multiple occasions.
I'm not sure about that. That was my conclusion a while back when Facebook suggested that I friend a bunch of people that I didn't know. Then I realized that a number of the people it was suggesting were people who lived in my apartment building or worked in the same building, or even people who work on the same block as I do. It was a bunch of people
Re: (Score:3)
I live on the 45 floor and I don't know the people living on the exact same GPS spot in the lower floors.
Its not really the exact same GPS spot, GPS is three dimensional and includes a vertical component. That would be a serious bug to only consider lattitude and longitude.
Simple fix (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't use Facebook.
Re:Simple fix (Score:5, Informative)
That's not a fix anymore. They have managed to build profiles on almost anyone. How do they know your bank account information if you don't have a FB account? How do they know it if you do and have never used your bank account with it? This has gone beyond scary.
Dump Facebook (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How? Purchasing datasets and mining them. That's how they connected this person to her clients. They didn't need any of their *own* data to do that.
Re: (Score:3)
No, I understand. But I'm assuming that people still *care* that Facebook has this information even if they don't personally *see* it.
Re:Dump Facebook (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dense people that have you in their address list share it with Facebook and you have been assimilated...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Simpler fix - don't be a prostitute.
Prostitutes are more moral than clergy.
But one practices a victimless crime while the latter can rip people off with impunity because of "religious freedom".
Re:Simple fix (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Simple fix (Score:5, Interesting)
My ex did a paper as part of her masters about sex workers. A surprising percentage of private room bookings did not involve a sex act so much as a counseling session. These girls were discreet and honestly cheaper than a shrink.
she said (Score:2)
Don't use facebook for such service (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Read TFS again (don't even need to read TFA, I didn't either). She only has a "private" profile. Not one of her "professional" service. Only one where she is Mrs. Normal living a normal life, with a normal job, normal friends, normal hobbies...
Read first, then comment (Score:2)
That she didn't use Facebook to connect with her clients, was a pretty big point. It says so right there in the synopsis: "Her sex-work identity is not on the social network at all"
Their app reads your contacts... (Score:5, Informative)
...and this is how it knows who you associate with. In later versions of Android (and perhaps in iOS), you can deny permissions to read your contacts, but the app will likely work hard to get around that.
If you have contacts on your phone that you don't want Facebook to know about, then you must not load their app
- only access them through a dedicated, privacy-focused web browser (or an equivalent sandboxing app).
I like FaceSlim on F-Droid. I would never, ever run their app. That thing is a monster.
Re:Their app reads your contacts... (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. I have two accounts. One which I've used for years on my personal laptop, and a second one I recently created behind a VPN and which I've only used from a separate laptop, within a private Chrome tab, with no personal details at all. There is absolutely no link between the two accounts, other than my own eyes looking at both. No pics, no FB app, nothing.
Two weeks after I created the new account, FB started suggesting friends from my old account. I'm not sure how they do it but it's truly terrifying.
Re:Their app reads your contacts... (Score:5, Interesting)
They might be using canvas fingerprinting. There are add-ons to block it. I use CanvasFingerprintBlock.
Canvas fingerprinting works in incognito mode, works with ad-blockers, works if you block cookies, works if you use a VPN... And if you install a blocker you will quickly find that a large proportion of sites are trying to use it.
Re:Their app reads your contacts... (Score:4, Informative)
All you need to do is visit one site in common with both laptops and they can link the two accounts.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not just contacts:
1. inbound/outbound phone #s
2. Location information (proximity)
3. IP address (connected to same wireless network)
There are plenty of tricks to determine that two people have been in close proximity when you can access data from their phone.
this isn't new (Score:5, Interesting)
A decade ago Facebook sent me an email, suggesting that I create an account (as I didn't have one) and also telling me that I probably knew three different people - one that I worked with, one that I socialised with and one family member.
None of those people had the same email address for me.
I wonder if the UK DPA or upcoming GDPR legislation will let me force Facebook to reveal their matching algorithm - see Article 15 paragraph 1(h) of the regulation (PDF at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal... [europa.eu] )
Re: this isn't new (Score:2)
That would be awesome. When algorithms impact the lives of hundreds of millions, people deserve to know how those algorithms work.
Inaccurate Headline? (Score:2)
How Facebook Outs Sex Workers
Re:Inaccurate Headline? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's also the much more critical question "Why the fuck are people still using Facebook after all these nightmarish news?"
The usual Facebook behaviour (Score:2)
Even though I have never had any relation with that company I've experienced similar, years ago Facebook mailed me with the sugestion to yoin people I know.
My stupid sister and a cousin had shared their address lists with Facebook and the algorithm added 1 + 1 is me...
At least they gave an option to opt out of further mail but I'm sure they are still following me around, even though I use plug ins to remove their spying icons from web sites.
I'll leave further comments to my signature.
My best bet is: Location (Score:2)
Easy to figure out (Score:2)
I can think of a variety of ways Facebook could figure out who you interact with. The most obvious is that many people carry around a smartphone with the ability to track their whereabouts. It's not all that hard for a company like Facebook to notice that two people are in close proximity with some regularity if they have some tracking software installed on your smartphone or PC.
Frankly I value my privacy too much to want to have anything to do with Facebook. I simply don't trust the company to be respon
Had the exact same effing thing happen to me (Score:5, Interesting)
I come from a middle eastern Muslim country. My views about religion and other issues will surely anger people I know. To vent, I made two accounts on facebook, one for my friends, and one where I express my views including religious ones under a separate identity.
On the 'anonymous' account, I just put my first name and at worst, extremely general hints about my life , since I assumed no one I know will see it. I used a separate, anonymous, e-mail for this account, and used to access it from a separate browser. The only link was probably my IP address / user agent, or maybe I tried to view my profile from the other account, but that's it.
I was once chatting with a real-life Muslim friend and she started making hints about statuses I post on my other account. Nothing serious happened, since shes a terrible Muslim herself, but this could have easily put my life in danger had this been known to other people. I learned to NEVER trust facebook with my privacy ever since this happened.
Breaking out my tinfoil hat (Score:2)
Removed control setting suggested as fix (Score:3)
"People can always control who can send them friend requests by visiting their account settings," said the spokesperson. "If they select 'no one,' they won't appear in others' People You May Know."
Um, Facebook removed the option for "no one" to send friend requests years ago. The most restrictive now is "Friends of friends".
In other words... (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop being on Facebook.
Except Facebook will remember you even if you delete your account.
Except Facebook will remember you even if you have separate accounts.
Except Facebook will find out who you are if you have friends and family on Facebook. Especially if they mention you by name in a Facebook post.
Except Facebook is probably tracking you right now because of all those little "like" buttons you can see everywhere.
Except Facebook... Oh, fsck it, I give up.
Frankly, who needs the NSA when you have Facebook? Oh, wait, they are probably working together right now.
Wasn't there a story about that creep Zuckerberg wanting to become President of the United States of Facebook?
Comment removed (Score:3)
it's worse... (Score:3, Interesting)
I once tried to create an anonymous (false identity) account on facebook, which I wanted to use to access the private group of a sportsclub that insists on using facebook for sharing pictures and videos, they also use whatsapp.
I don't want to be on facebook, because I don't trust them, so therefore I didn't use any of my know e-mail adresses or phonenumbers (I thought) to create the account.
In the short time the account worked (and I used tor-browser to access facebook, exclusively!) facebook suggested several people whom I know in real life, but who didn't know I was on facebook or with the sportsclub. The account I created did not have a picture of me, but of a doll that didn't look at all like a human face.
I have no clue how this can be done, but facebook has some very sneaky ways to find connections between people. This alone should be enough reason for anyone who wants to keep some social lives separate to avoid facebook altogether. And I'm sure that despite my not being on facebook, it has an entire profile of me waiting to be associated with my account, should I create one.
Someone summarized this quite well: don't use facebook.
Correlated Positions and Movements (Score:5, Interesting)
Facebook makes suggestions based on correlated movements and positions. If you arrive and depart from the same location at the same time as another person a few times it may suggest them as a friend. There isn't really any mystery to this (unless you are someone like a journalist or Facebook user who never read any of the agreements you accepted).
We could have a debate as to whether or not this should be opt-in, or legal, or whatever, but there shouldn't really be any debate that it is an effective method of determining people who might know each other, and there shouldn't be any mystery that it's done when it has all been plainly discussed before. You can at least opt out of some of it, or adjust your privacy settings to prevent it.
Just imagine that Facebook is your mom and every time you load up the app it's like calling your mom and telling her where you are. And everyone else around you is also calling your mom and telling them they are there too, and you and everybody else are constantly calling back every 10 minutes to give her updates. Provided your mom has a lot of time on her hands and takes really good notes, pretty soon she's going to figure out who you are hanging out with.
Facebook has been creeping for a long time (Score:3)
Six or seven years ago, when I first started using Facebook, it kept suggesting a landlord I'd had five years previously as someone I might know. He was an okay guy, but we never socialized beyond pleasantries when I handed him the rent check and we had no online connections at all. I presume FB is either searching through municipal records or purchasing banking data.
Re:STOP USING FACEBOOK: problem solved (Score:4, Insightful)
No! Are you crazy? I won't delete my Facebook account.
I'll keep it in the empty state it is now, lest someone creates one in my name and abuses it to slander me.
Re:And now skype (Score:4, Insightful)
https://signal.org/ [signal.org]
Re:And now skype (Score:5, Interesting)
When I was going to install signal because of all the good things I heard about it, my phone presented me with a *massive* list of permissions the Signal app wants [signal.org]:
- read sensitive log data
- find accounts on the device
- read your own contact card
- modify your own contact card
- read calendar events plus confidential information
- add or modify calendar events and send email to guests without owners' knowledge
- find accounts on the device
- read your contacts
- modify your contacts
- approximate location (network-based)
- precise location (GPS and network-based)
- read your text messages (SMS or MMS)
- receive text messages (MMS)
- receive text messages (SMS)
- send SMS messages
- edit your text messages (SMS or MMS)
- directly call phone numbers
- directly call any phone numbers
- modify phone state
- reroute outgoing calls
- read call log
- read phone status and identity
- write call log
- read the contents of your USB storage
- modify or delete the contents of your USB storage
- read the contents of your USB storage
- modify or delete the contents of your USB storage
- take pictures and videos
- record audio
- view Wi-Fi connections
- read phone status and identity
- send WAP-PUSH-received broadcast
- receive data from internet
- view network connections
- create accounts and set passwords
- pair with Bluetooth devices
- send sticky broadcast
- change network connectivity
- connect and disconnect from Wi-Fi
- disable your screen lock
- full network access
- change your audio settings
- read sync settings
- run at startup
- set wallpaper
- use accounts on the device
- control vibration
- prevent device from sleeping
- toggle sync on and off
Needless to say, I backed out.
Signal permissions (Score:3, Informative)
Here's what they say they need all of that for.
https://support.signal.org/hc/... [signal.org]
Re:Signal permissions (Score:5, Interesting)
Thanks for that link, Einstein. I traveled back in time and included it in my own post.
And in no way do they *need* all that. They *want* it to offer fancy functionality which is the *last* thing I want in an allegedly highly secure system. Just think of all the code that is required for those fancy features, and when it does get compromised, the attacker can pretty much do anything they want because they have all the permissions. Fuck that. They've lost their credibility to me by pulling off that incredibly stupid mode.
Re:Signal permissions (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Signal permissions (Score:4, Informative)
That may mean what they initially intend to use it for, it does not preclude them from changing what they do with it later.
Re:And now skype (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It trivial for Facebook to link the identities, she is using the same IP address to log in for both of them. It is then reasonable for the Facebook algorithm to guess that people logging in from the same IP address are related somehow.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:And now skype (Score:5, Interesting)
John has exchanged email with leila_sexworker
John's emails contain headers which include leila's IP address
John lets Facebook see his emails
There are several, perhaps many Johns
Facebook sees that all these Johns have leila_sexworker in common
Facebook sees leila's IP address and matches it with its own records
Facebook sees leila_clean logging in to Facebook from the same IP address, repeatedly
Facebook makes the connection
Re:And now skype (Score:5, Insightful)
Which begs the question - why does Facebook suggest 'people you might know' based on anything other than their being Facebook friends of your Facebook friends? And how would it hurt them to let you opt out of that?
The weird thing is that, having put enough effort into this particularly creepy kind of 'connection', the actual 'search for people you know' functionality on Facebook is horrible. You can search by name - that's it. Useless for any kind of common name - and even when the person you're searching for shows up in the list, you can't narrow it down by searching on location or any other keywords, so if you don't recognize their photo, you're out of luck.
Re: And now skype (Score:5, Informative)
Not only IP addresses.
Facebook connected me with someone I had brief contact with from back in the late 1980â(TM)s and FIDO BBSâ(TM)s. Predating my time on the Internet, this was puzzling to me.
It turned out I contacted them once via hotmail and that was it.
Yet somehow Facebook has this information, and to this day continually lists them in the âoepeople you may knowâ section.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It trivial for Facebook to link the identities, she is using the same IP address to log in for both of them. It is then reasonable for the Facebook algorithm to guess that people logging in from the same IP address are related somehow.
More likely the simple answer is that she was clueless about how deep their tentacles are and used the same browser without logging out of Facebook first. Thus since just about every website insists on haven't FB's "like" button somewhere on their page, FB gets the details to do the math.
A smart person (can that be said of a Facebook user?) would at least go as far as using an entirely separate computer for business and personal stuff. Still not fool proof by any stretch, but every little bit helps.
Re:And now skype (Score:5, Informative)
According to the summary(That you obviously didn't read), she only has a FB account that's linked to her real life identity.
Her sex-work identity is not on the social network at all
There is no other account for FB to conclude is owned by the same person.
Whatever is happening isn't what you think is.
LK
Re: (Score:3)
There's a few more things that go into fingerprinting. Unless she was using different VMs on different computers the algorithm I sold years ago to one of those evil advertising corporations would correlate.
IP isn't as unique as you'd think. I've seem colleges have ONE public IP for all outbound data across campus, including all dorms. Start adding in other information your browser gives away like extensions and versions, user agent, screen resolution, mouse sensitivity, etc etc and you can narrow down to a
Facebook tracks your MAC addresses as well... (Score:4, Informative)
Probably snoops your browser history and tracks to which cell towers your phone connects to as well.
A while back, son of a distant cousin (distant in relation, close geographically) had some issues with his PC so he called me for help.
It sounded like the issue was power related but he assured me that his PSU had enough power to run it all.
It was the PSU. He read the wrong numbers on the box.
BUT... After I downloaded a GPU test to check my suspicions about his computer, which naturally required an internet connection, and he took his computer home with an advice what to buy so his games would no longer crash the system - he starts appearing as "people you may know" on my Facebook profile.
Despite the fact that we have no direct connection on Facebook. His dad is not on any social network. Same for his mom.
And he's too young to be in social circles of our mutual cousins.
But once his computer connected to the internet through my router... there he is.
On another note... got a new phone which (naturally) has cell tower broadcast notifications turned on by default.
Which I notice only as it starts pinging me with notifications as I go around town and move between different cell towers.
Coincidentally, during that same walk I notice a former colleague on the other side of the street, going home from work.
He doesn't even notice me, he's on the other side of the street, there's traffic between us, and I'm not about to shout and wave or jump around for him to notice me.
We never were that close anyway... which is the reason why I don't have him in my Facebook contacts.
But we do both have some of the same former colleagues in our friend lists... and I was just in his neighborhood.
And there he is the next day on top of the "people you may know" list. He was probably on it the whole time... but now he's on top of it.
As soon as his phone and my phone were near the same cell tower at the same time and as my phone connected to my wireless router once back home.
Facebook has shadow profiles on everyone already. [slashdot.org]
All it needs is for some of the gathered data to start matching to geographical and time coordinates one's technology, friends or even interests leave all over the place - and it can start making some pretty educated guesses.
Re: (Score:3)
No, the app on cell phone A notices you are at location X at a certain time (using location data) The same app (or from the same corporation) on cell phone B notices you near location X at almost the same time. A and B also happen to have a mutual friend C...
Chances are good that if A and B know C, and A and B were near each other that A and B might know each other as well...
Re: (Score:3)
AN app on a phone can easily get the info. Here's the API on android https://developer.android.com/... [android.com]
Re:And now skype (Score:5, Informative)
There WASN'T two accounts-- she DID NOT HAVE an account for her professional work.
Seriously, how hard is it to read a damn article before taking the know-it-all route.
Re: (Score:3)
Ad tracking networks will still link her if she is on the same IP address.
Re: (Score:3)
This is the correct answer. Facebook sees you in the same location, (by network or GPS association) and therefore decides you might want to be friends.
This wonderful piece of logic is exactly what you need to become better acquainted with that creepy guy who always seems to be hanging around your gym. Or the work colleague that you tolerate but certainly don't want to socialise with. Or your annoying neighbour. Or your stalker.
Re: (Score:3)
She needs to have a vanilla phone and a sex work not-smartphone, and only carry the appropriate phone at the appropriate time.
Re: (Score:3)
Facebook requires you to use your real name on your account. Failure to do so is a violation of their terms of service and they can lock your account.
Sartre is probably rolling at his grave at the prospect of locking accounts that people don't have, as punishment for behavior they aren't doing, to accounts they don't have. Are you seriously suggesting that she's violating the ToS by not having a second account using her professional name? She is already using her real name on the account she does have according to the summary.
Re: (Score:3)
I think the implication is that Facebook is not suitable for her kind of work because it doesn't permit aliases.
A friend of mine who's living in a homophobic community had two Facebook profiles. One was squeaky-clean closet guy, the other was for the guys from the gay bars.
He added me on the squeaky-clean profile, but I would regularly get "people you might know" and it was his gay-bar profile. I warned him about it and he no longer uses Facebook for anything.