If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IT World)   Don't install the Facebook Messenger app if you don't want the Zuck rifling through your stuff   (itworld.com) divider line 53
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

3000 clicks; posted to Geek » on 15 Aug 2014 at 1:28 PM (19 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-15 11:27:58 AM  
If I thought anyone gave a shiat about my stuff, I'd be flattered.

And why do people who post photos of every meal they eat on Facebook suddenly get all offended about invasions of privacy?
 
2014-08-15 11:46:32 AM  

Confabulat: And why do people who post photos of every meal they eat on Facebook suddenly get all offended about invasions of privacy?


Because they made the choice to share that aspect of their life, but not every single one?

I may post a photo of something I cooked that came out really well, or photos from when we went to the zoo, or a status update about doing laundry, but that doesn't mean there is nothing private in my life.
 
2014-08-15 12:20:12 PM  

serpent_sky: Confabulat: And why do people who post photos of every meal they eat on Facebook suddenly get all offended about invasions of privacy?

Because they made the choice to share that aspect of their life, but not every single one?

I may post a photo of something I cooked that came out really well, or photos from when we went to the zoo, or a status update about doing laundry, but that doesn't mean there is nothing private in my life.


I have like six Facebook accounts. I have like 30 email accounts.

You can choose the person you present online.
 
2014-08-15 12:21:58 PM  
Oh please, the link in the article already explains how this bruhaha is all for nothing.
They need permission to your mic, camera, etc. so YOU can use them, not them.

http://www.zdnet.com/facebook-messenger-much-ado-about-nothing-70000 32 520/

/bruhaha
 
2014-08-15 12:27:21 PM  

Confabulat: I have like six Facebook accounts. I have like 30 email accounts.

You can choose the person you present online.


Yep... I have e-mails I use for business/job applications; e-mail for FB; e-mail for Fark.  I used to have a FB account for my old job (since deleted) that used my whole name; my real world one uses my first and middle name and does not list my city and state since I am looking for a job and have no interest in employers poking around my band/out of work life as it's not their business. I also keep mine set to friends only and have a huge block list, mostly extended family I want nothing to do with.

I pick and choose what I share when and where. I am sure there are ways around it, but someone would have to actually care and make an effort.
 
2014-08-15 12:34:03 PM  
Well my brother is a bit of a paranoid recluse and he's refused to ever sign up for Facebook because of his internet paranoia.

I'm like Pete, no one gives a shiat what you do anyway. What scares you so much?
 
2014-08-15 12:35:50 PM  
My main FB account lists Fark U as my education though, which makes me laugh when I'm commenting on some site that makes me laugh when I comment on Fox News or something. They show that right up top.
 
2014-08-15 12:40:29 PM  
I'm not that interesting.  Zuckerberg can have at it.  I do have one question, though.  Whose dick to I have to stroke to get rid of the farking circle face picture thinger that shows up all over my phone every time somebody sends me a message?  it won't farking go away.  I was actually casually talking to a girl at a bar last night (yeah, I know, I'm as shocked as anyone) and every time I looked at my farking phone, there was little circle picture of my mother was staring me back because she felt the need to let me know that the neighbors down the street got a new car for some reason and, "OMG, did you see the last episode of Crossbones?  That Jim Malkowitz sure is something!"  That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!
 
2014-08-15 12:47:58 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: I'm not that interesting.  Zuckerberg can have at it.  I do have one question, though.  Whose dick to I have to stroke to get rid of the farking circle face picture thinger that shows up all over my phone every time somebody sends me a message?  it won't farking go away.  I was actually casually talking to a girl at a bar last night (yeah, I know, I'm as shocked as anyone) and every time I looked at my farking phone, there was little circle picture of my mother was staring me back because she felt the need to let me know that the neighbors down the street got a new car for some reason and, "OMG, did you see the last episode of Crossbones?  That Jim Malkowitz sure is something!"  That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!


Grab it, throw it to the X at the bottom of the screen. It's gone. You're welcome.
 
2014-08-15 12:55:19 PM  

Walker: Doctor Funkenstein: I'm not that interesting.  Zuckerberg can have at it.  I do have one question, though.  Whose dick to I have to stroke to get rid of the farking circle face picture thinger that shows up all over my phone every time somebody sends me a message?  it won't farking go away.  I was actually casually talking to a girl at a bar last night (yeah, I know, I'm as shocked as anyone) and every time I looked at my farking phone, there was little circle picture of my mother was staring me back because she felt the need to let me know that the neighbors down the street got a new car for some reason and, "OMG, did you see the last episode of Crossbones?  That Jim Malkowitz sure is something!"  That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!

Grab it, throw it to the X at the bottom of the screen. It's gone. You're welcome.


Jesus Christ, is it that easy?  I need to quit drinking.  Or drink more.  One or the other.
 
2014-08-15 01:31:14 PM  
Doesn't every app have the same sort of horribly invasive terms of service?
 
2014-08-15 01:33:14 PM  
It's only a matter of time anyway before they make the Messenger app mandatory for using Facebook.
 
2014-08-15 01:33:20 PM  

Confabulat: I have like six Facebook accounts. I have like 30 email accounts.

You can choose the person you present online.


Six?  I can see work and personal.  Or maybe work, family, and friends.

But six?

How narrow have you gone with these?  Do you have one for MILFs, one for underage girls, one for college girls, etc.?
 
2014-08-15 01:33:48 PM  
That is a horrible article.
 
2014-08-15 01:34:32 PM  
Not FTFA, but should be:

"But they'll have all of my information! This is an infringement of my privacy."- John Quinton Smith, marketing intern, age 21, 5'8 inches tall, 145 lbs., born 3-31-1993 at 10:40 AM in Lowell, Massachusetts, second son of David and Sandy Smith, student at UMass-Amhurst, graduate of South Boston High School (Class of 2011), white, registered Democrat, owner of an iPhone, lover of bacon who uses Facebook.
 
2014-08-15 01:38:47 PM  

Troy McClure: Doesn't every app have the same sort of horribly invasive terms of service?


No

This new level will provide Facebook with your logins to every other account you use. So FB will know your Fark handle if you have ever posted on your smartphone. Will also know every email account you access. And all the other boards you post on. And every business you electronically pay bills to. Oh, and they grab your phone's contact list and call history.

But please go ahead and defend this new tier of invasion.
 
2014-08-15 01:41:44 PM  

empres77: It's only a matter of time anyway before they make the Messenger app mandatory for using Facebook.


That's all it'll take for them to lose one, mostly worthless (as I don't interact with any groups) member. I'll shake my tiny fist before I'll install their Messenger. Take that, Facebook!

/Not kidding, but FB isn't too much fun anymore, so meh.
 
2014-08-15 01:45:21 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!


idk.. ive never found texting your mother to be a boner killer... Quite the opposite..
 
2014-08-15 01:48:15 PM  
I enjoy all the trolly 1 star reviews of the messenger app on the apple store.

Stuff like "because this app is so shiatty I had to call my girlfriend.  fark you facebook"
 
2014-08-15 01:48:29 PM  
I looked at this as a step up.  they removed the messaging from my facebook.  Now if you want to send me a personal private message you need to know a person to person contact for me.  No more private messages from people only nominally in my social circles.  Yes, we played softball together, no, I won't pick you up at the bar.
 
2014-08-15 01:48:31 PM  
Its even MORE invasive?   I've long ago assumed that every click i've ever done on a computer can be cataloged and traced.    How could whatever Zuck is doing be more invasive than that?
 
2014-08-15 01:57:09 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: Walker: Doctor Funkenstein: I'm not that interesting.  Zuckerberg can have at it.  I do have one question, though.  Whose dick to I have to stroke to get rid of the farking circle face picture thinger that shows up all over my phone every time somebody sends me a message?  it won't farking go away.  I was actually casually talking to a girl at a bar last night (yeah, I know, I'm as shocked as anyone) and every time I looked at my farking phone, there was little circle picture of my mother was staring me back because she felt the need to let me know that the neighbors down the street got a new car for some reason and, "OMG, did you see the last episode of Crossbones?  That Jim Malkowitz sure is something!"  That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!

Grab it, throw it to the X at the bottom of the screen. It's gone. You're welcome.

Jesus Christ, is it that easy?  I need to quit drinking.  Or drink more.  One or the other.


I think you can turn the chat heads thing off completely somewhere in the options.
 
2014-08-15 01:59:44 PM  

T.rex: Its even MORE invasive?   I've long ago assumed that every click i've ever done on a computer can be cataloged and traced.    How could whatever Zuck is doing be more invasive than that?


Your ISP knows where you go online. So does some tracking tools. Businesses don't generally know what goes on during a secure login/connection. What Facebook is doing is using the snartphone's OS to act as spyware - recording activity from your side of secure connections.
 
2014-08-15 02:02:01 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: Jesus Christ, is it that easy? I need to quit drinking. Or drink more. One or the other.


I don't know if its that easy, but if you open messenger and go into options, the ability to turn it off is in there under "Chat heads".
 
2014-08-15 02:09:17 PM  
As if the regular Facebook app isn't logging your every move...
 
2014-08-15 02:14:48 PM  
Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEP

and I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORK

and I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?
 
2014-08-15 02:38:52 PM  
Facebook is pointless anyhow.
I don't see how anyone can spend more than 5 minutes a day using it, unless they play games, most of which are old news now (Do people still play Farmville?.
If you want to talk to people use the phone or email.
If you want to share pictures use email, Instagram, or zillion other things.
If you want a website, make one.
Even if you use Facebook, you look at the few updates that day from the 20 people you haven't spoken to in 15 years and close the tab.
 
2014-08-15 02:43:40 PM  

semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?


Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.
 
2014-08-15 02:54:40 PM  

qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.


If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en
 
2014-08-15 03:01:53 PM  

semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?


It would need to have the code to do what it is allowed to do.  But most companies don't release their code out into the wild, so you have to take their word for it that the code doesn't allow it.  And there is nothing preventing them from adding such code in a patch.  In other words, I would be willing to bet it can't; but I wouldn't be willing to bet it never will - especially since Facebook likes to drop rather Obey Your Overlords type stinkers into their TOS and not tell anybody.

One thing is that people do kinda like it when an app or program can interface with other apps/programs - it can make things a lot easier to manage.  For instance, RSS feeds made it easier to keep track of sites you liked to read without having to manually visit each one just to see if there was something new/worth reading.  And so apps/programs have developed ways to integrate with other apps/programs as a built-in design feature.  You can see this with games or websites that let you post score or articles straight to Facebook - it is easier and it does make you more willing to post things there.  And I don't see a problem with that - it is functionality that helps them and helps me.  However, I get to decide that.  But some enterprising farkwad (I would suspect the Farmville assholes, but that would be crediting them with an original thought, which I believe is an impossibility under the current understanding of the laws of the physical universe), realized you could force that sharing by simply having App A tell App B that you gave it permission to do that - and you did somewhere on page 32,710 of the TOS.  So everyone else saw that Jerkface Inc suddenly was able to flood the zone with essentially free advertising.  And once App A on your device is telling App B to let it do things, there isn't any reason it cannot make it look like you personally did it - hence the rolling hell of your friends all of the sudden becoming unpaid shills for every product under the sun on Facebook.  The real worrisome thing is that you are seeing more and more companies require you let them masquerade as you just to use an app or program that doesn't require that - because they figure if you want their product you must be willing to let them appropriate you as unpaid labor because that makes them money.  It is similar to Microsoft with Explorer back in the Netscape days.  There was no reason Explorer had to be tied that closely to the operating system, but by making it that way, Microsoft could justify kicking Netscape in the nuts, and most people would go along because not installing Windows wasn't really a practical option.

There is also the added wrinkle of Androids permissions scheme.  The idea is probably meant to be helpful.  You don't present people with 600 options just so they can play Tap the Screen Obsessively Dammit #272721718.  So you make just a few options.  Thus the options are broad.  But that also means that if I design an app that needs just a wee bit of Option 12 to function as I intend (and let's assume I am a decent guy and really do just need that little bit), I also get access to all possible permutations of Option 12.  And I don't actually have to ever tell you I am changing how much of Option 12 I am using.  Which means you cannot be sure I won't become a greedy asshole later - or sell/get bought out by Complete Farking Shiat-Stains Inc. next week.  the actual solution is that Android is going to have to set up all 600 necessary permission blocks - but that will be a lot of work for them with no direct payoff - so they will put it off as long as the money from unscrupulous app-makers exceeds the revenue lost from people not using Android apps.
 
2014-08-15 03:03:59 PM  

madgonad: T.rex: Its even MORE invasive?   I've long ago assumed that every click i've ever done on a computer can be cataloged and traced.    How could whatever Zuck is doing be more invasive than that?

Your ISP knows where you go online. So does some tracking tools. Businesses don't generally know what goes on during a secure login/connection. What Facebook is doing is using the snartphone's OS to act as spyware - recording activity from your side of secure connections.


I appreciate that explanation.  Its informative for whats going on.  but heck.... even the ads i get on this very Fark site are targeted at me... The banner ads are something i was just searching for on ebay or elsewhere.... i mean, in terms of businesses, we are continually being fed targeted ads.... its just the reality.... Websites have to make money or they won't exist.
 
2014-08-15 03:25:24 PM  

Walker: Oh please, the link in the article already explains how this bruhaha is all for nothing.
They need permission to your mic, camera, etc. so YOU can use them, not them.

http://www.zdnet.com/facebook-messenger-much-ado-about-nothing-70000 32 520/

/bruhaha


As they say... Why not both?

/only one of these parties stands to increase profits based on scooping the other
 
2014-08-15 03:27:32 PM  

rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en


Sure, but with root access required most people's phones aren't going to be in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.
 
2014-08-15 03:37:11 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: Walker: Doctor Funkenstein: I'm not that interesting.  Zuckerberg can have at it.  I do have one question, though.  Whose dick to I have to stroke to get rid of the farking circle face picture thinger that shows up all over my phone every time somebody sends me a message?  it won't farking go away.  I was actually casually talking to a girl at a bar last night (yeah, I know, I'm as shocked as anyone) and every time I looked at my farking phone, there was little circle picture of my mother was staring me back because she felt the need to let me know that the neighbors down the street got a new car for some reason and, "OMG, did you see the last episode of Crossbones?  That Jim Malkowitz sure is something!"  That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!

Grab it, throw it to the X at the bottom of the screen. It's gone. You're welcome.

Jesus Christ, is it that easy? I need to quit drinking.  Or drink more.  One or the other.


Unless you are Canadian. Then you have to flip it over and set it on fire.
 
2014-08-15 03:41:09 PM  
My fiance got me an iphone a couple months ago. I have yet to find an app I think would be useful to me. 99% of my iphone usage is
her and I conversing through text messages.

/I guess I just don't give a fark
//dont go anywhere
///dont talk to anybody
 
2014-08-15 03:43:26 PM  

qorkfiend: rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en

Sure, but with root access required most people's phones aren't going to be in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.


Because rooting a phone is so difficult...
 
2014-08-15 04:07:00 PM  
i use chrome on my mobile for fb and i get my messages fine.
 
2014-08-15 04:49:49 PM  

rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en


You did see that big "4.3" on that page, right? That level of permissions control was removed in 4.4
 
2014-08-15 04:51:05 PM  

rustypouch: qorkfiend: rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en

Sure, but with root access required most people's phones aren't going to be in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

Because rooting a phone is so difficult...


Right, because what I said was "rooting a phone is so difficult!" and not "Most people don't root their phones." Reading comprehension, it is your friend.
 
2014-08-15 05:08:07 PM  

scanman61: rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en

You did see that big "4.3" on that page, right? That level of permissions control was removed in 4.4


That's the rating, out of 5.

It's compatible with 4.0.3 - 4.4.4. https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacy#xprivacy

qorkfiend: rustypouch: qorkfiend: rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en

Sure, but with root access required most people's phones aren't going to be in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

Because rooting a phone is so difficult...

Right, because what I said was "rooting a phone is so difficult!" and not "Most people don't root their phones." Reading comprehension, it is your friend.


You said most people's phones aren't in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

It's possible to change that, by rooting. Why wouldn't you, unless you're lazy or stupid? Or are you just whining about your lack of tech knowledge, and your inability to express yourself in a fashion which allows others to clearly understand what you mean?
 
2014-08-15 05:09:44 PM  
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb farks
 
2014-08-15 05:12:20 PM  
I do have a Facebook account, but I don't use it much at all, so Zuck knows very little about one Llewellyn Puppybreath.
 
2014-08-15 05:17:03 PM  

rustypouch: You said most people's phones aren't in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

It's possible to change that, by rooting. Why wouldn't you, unless you're lazy or stupid?


I didn't say people couldn't root their phones. I said people usually don't root their phones.

There are literally dozens of reasons why people don't root their phones which are neither because they're lazy or stupid.

The fact that I've now had to explain this three times doesn't say much about your intelligence.
 
2014-08-15 05:22:37 PM  

qorkfiend: rustypouch: You said most people's phones aren't in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

It's possible to change that, by rooting. Why wouldn't you, unless you're lazy or stupid?

I didn't say people couldn't root their phones. I said people usually don't root their phones.

There are literally dozens of reasons why people don't root their phones which are neither because they're lazy or stupid.

The fact that I've now had to explain this three times doesn't say much about your intelligence.


You presented rooting as some sort of huge obstacle. I countered that it wasn't difficult, which you took objection to, implying that you consider rooting to be an especially tricky challenge.

If you've had to explain yourself multiple times, it doesn't say much about your grasp of the English language.
 
2014-08-15 06:26:43 PM  
I installed it because fearmongering, lol, and I deleted it almost immediately because every time I opened the damn thing it would ask me for permission to push notifications. I don't need pushed notifications because I'm already checking the damn thing obsessively anyway.

/I'll get over it
 
2014-08-15 06:28:12 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: Walker: Doctor Funkenstein: I'm not that interesting.  Zuckerberg can have at it.  I do have one question, though.  Whose dick to I have to stroke to get rid of the farking circle face picture thinger that shows up all over my phone every time somebody sends me a message?  it won't farking go away.  I was actually casually talking to a girl at a bar last night (yeah, I know, I'm as shocked as anyone) and every time I looked at my farking phone, there was little circle picture of my mother was staring me back because she felt the need to let me know that the neighbors down the street got a new car for some reason and, "OMG, did you see the last episode of Crossbones?  That Jim Malkowitz sure is something!"  That's a boner killer and that shiat should be against the law!

Grab it, throw it to the X at the bottom of the screen. It's gone. You're welcome.

Jesus Christ, is it that easy?  I need to quit drinking.  Or drink more.  One or the other.


Or just avoid checking your phone while you're chatting up interesting women. They don't like that sort of thing.
 
2014-08-15 07:12:46 PM  
Eh, I had to sign a bunch of stuff to run some wire in one of their datacenters. I'm pretty sure that for thext 50 years Zuckerberg could walk up to me and rip out a kidney whenever he feels like it.
 
2014-08-15 08:48:37 PM  
The more important question is:

Is it r-iff-ling or is it r-eye-fling?
 
2014-08-15 09:56:58 PM  

rustypouch: scanman61: rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en

You did see that big "4.3" on that page, right? That level of permissions control was removed in 4.4

That's the rating, out of 5.

It's compatible with 4.0.3 - 4.4.4. https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacy#xprivacy

qorkfiend: rustypouch: qorkfiend: rustypouch: qorkfiend: semiotix: Okay, someone help my old ass out. I know that phase one of this panic has basically gone


ZOMG IT CAN CALL YOUR PHONE, READ YOUR E-MAIL AND WATCH YOU WHILE YOU SLEEPand I know that phase two is everyone saying


LOL STFU N00BS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE THINGS TO WORKand I get how that's apparently exactly correct.

So, okay, it's not Facebook's fault that they have to ask to use my phone, etc. But here's what I want to know. Is there  any way to know from the  actual code itselfwhether the app is able to do all those other, sketchier things?

I.e., I know that Android permissions are set up such that all the phone stuff goes together. But an app that didn't have code making it possible to actually dial my phone couldn't dial my phone, even if it had permission because it needed to detect incoming calls.

In other words, am I safe from the worst case scenario because the app literally can't do the things it has permission to do, or only because Facebook pinky-swears it never  would, even though it  could?

Pretty much impossible to tell without reverse-engineering the app. It's possible to have hardware elements that can't be used without user interaction - the permissions merely allow the app to request use of those features - but to me the larger concern is reading information already on the phone, like your text messages or your contact list, and sending those to Facebook.

If you're concerned, and on Android, it is possible to limit those things.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=biz.bokhorst.xprivacy. in staller&hl=en

Sure, but with root access required most people's phones aren't going to be in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

Because rooting a phone is so difficult...

Right, because what I said was "rooting a phone is so difficult!" and not "Most people don't root their phones." Reading comprehension, it is your friend.

You said most people's phones aren't in a configuration where that app is a workable solution.

It's possible to change that, by rooting. Why wouldn't you, unless you're lazy or stupid? Or are you just whining about your lack of tech knowledge, and your inability to express yourself in a fashion which allows others to clearly understand what you mean?


My bad...I didn't realize it required rooting. I just knew that App Ops got removed from normal access with 4.4.2

/Don't be evil, Google
 
2014-08-15 10:40:59 PM  

T.rex: madgonad: T.rex: Its even MORE invasive?   I've long ago assumed that every click i've ever done on a computer can be cataloged and traced.    How could whatever Zuck is doing be more invasive than that?

Your ISP knows where you go online. So does some tracking tools. Businesses don't generally know what goes on during a secure login/connection. What Facebook is doing is using the snartphone's OS to act as spyware - recording activity from your side of secure connections.

I appreciate that explanation.  Its informative for whats going on.  but heck.... even the ads i get on this very Fark site are targeted at me... The banner ads are something i was just searching for on ebay or elsewhere.... i mean, in terms of businesses, we are continually being fed targeted ads.... its just the reality.... Websites have to make money or they won't exist.


Those are based on browsing habits and for Google-based ads some input from Gmail accounts. The concern is capturing all of the puzzle pieces of your life because it is using your smartphone to get detailed info on what you do away from Facebook. And WHEN (not if) Facebook is hacked the thieves will OWN you since they will no everywhere you and everything you do.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report