Topic: How Facebook tracks you even if you aren't logged in.
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 started this discussion 15 years ago #12,315
http://nikcub.appspot.com/logging-out-of-facebook-is-not-enough
> The advice is to log out of Facebook. But logging out of Facebook only de-authorizes your browser from the web application, a number of cookies (including your account number) are still sent along to all requests to facebook.com. Even if you are logged out, Facebook still knows and can track every page you visit. The only solution is to delete every Facebook cookie in your browser, or to use a separate browser for Facebook interactions.
Read the entire article, it's quite disturbing how much Facebook tracks you.
> The advice is to log out of Facebook. But logging out of Facebook only de-authorizes your browser from the web application, a number of cookies (including your account number) are still sent along to all requests to facebook.com. Even if you are logged out, Facebook still knows and can track every page you visit. The only solution is to delete every Facebook cookie in your browser, or to use a separate browser for Facebook interactions.
Read the entire article, it's quite disturbing how much Facebook tracks you.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later[^] [v] #221,503
Oh god wat. I wonder how often other sites do this as well.
vocalon !bx4albvqPs joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,504
Yet another reason to NOT USE JEWBOOK.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 21 seconds later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,505
Anonymous D likes this.(Edited 19 seconds later.)
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 seconds later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,506
@221,503 (B)
Google, Yahoo, and other search engines do, but not to the extend that Facebook does (since everyone and their grandmother has a stupid like button on their website).
Google, Yahoo, and other search engines do, but not to the extend that Facebook does (since everyone and their grandmother has a stupid like button on their website).
(Edited 25 seconds later.)
hamfist !!snnYcROO9 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,507
This is me giving a fuckltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,508
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,522
Part of me feels that a persistent online identity would be a good thing, no trolls, flamewars, people acting like normal polite human beings online, then I also want places like this to still exist.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 26 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #221,524
Nexus !jNexusRe/. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 38 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #221,539
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #221,545
dreamworks !AUIkTW/L46 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 28 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #221,546
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,583
I’m an engineer who works on login systems at Facebook. Thanks, again for raising these important issues. We haven’t done as good a job as we could have to explain our cookie practices. Your post presents a great opportunity for us to fix that. At the same time, your post reaches some incorrect conclusions that I hope to clarify.
Generally, unlike other major Internet companies, we have no interest in tracking people. We don’t have an ad network and we don’t sell people’s information. As we state in our help center (http://www.facebook.com/help/?..., “We do not share or sell the information we see when you visit a website with a Facebook social plugin to third parties and we do not use it to deliver ads to you.â€
Said more plainly, our cookies aren’t used for tracking. They just aren’t. Instead, we use our cookies to either provide custom content (e.g. your friend’s likes within a social plugin), help improve or maintain our service (e.g. measuring click-through rates to help optimize performance), or protect our users and our service (e.g. defending denial of service attacks or requiring a second authentication factor for a login from a suspicious location).
The logged out cookies, specifically, are used primarily for safety and security protections, including:
- Identifying and disabling spammers and phishers
- Disabling registration if an underage user tries to re-register with a different birth date
- Helping people recover hacked accounts
- Powering account security features, such as login approvals and notifications
- Identifying shared computers to discourage the use of “Keep me logged in.â€
Most of the cookies that you highlight have benign names and values. For example, the “locale†cookie is simply user’s language and country. I do understand some of the confusion around the ‘act’ and ‘lu’ cookies. The poorly named ‘act’ cookie is a UNIX timestamp with milliseconds and a sequence number that we use to measure and optimize the speed of the site (‘act’ is an abbreviation for “actionâ€). We use the ‘lu’ cookie to identify public computers and discourage the checking of the keep me logged in box. On single user computers, we use the ‘lu’ cookie to prefill your facebook e-mail address on the login screen if you have *not* explicitly logged out.
We also maintain a cookie association between accounts and browsers. This is a key element of our phishing protections. However, contrary to your article, we do delete account-specific cookies when a user logs out of Facebook. As a result, we do not receive personally identifiable cookie information via HTTP Headers when these users browse the web.
Finally, we’ve confirmed that we don’t, and never have, used cookies to suggest friends. If you send us the user IDs of the test accounts you created, I’m happy to investigate further.
Again, my apologies that your previous concerns were not addressed. Since your reports, we’ve introduced a bug bounty program to streamline and reward whitehat security reports (http://www.facebook.com/note.p.... I hope this more secure and reliable channel will be useful for you. We really hope you’ll continue to let us know about issues you see.
I hope these clarifications were helpful. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further.
Generally, unlike other major Internet companies, we have no interest in tracking people. We don’t have an ad network and we don’t sell people’s information. As we state in our help center (http://www.facebook.com/help/?..., “We do not share or sell the information we see when you visit a website with a Facebook social plugin to third parties and we do not use it to deliver ads to you.â€
Said more plainly, our cookies aren’t used for tracking. They just aren’t. Instead, we use our cookies to either provide custom content (e.g. your friend’s likes within a social plugin), help improve or maintain our service (e.g. measuring click-through rates to help optimize performance), or protect our users and our service (e.g. defending denial of service attacks or requiring a second authentication factor for a login from a suspicious location).
The logged out cookies, specifically, are used primarily for safety and security protections, including:
- Identifying and disabling spammers and phishers
- Disabling registration if an underage user tries to re-register with a different birth date
- Helping people recover hacked accounts
- Powering account security features, such as login approvals and notifications
- Identifying shared computers to discourage the use of “Keep me logged in.â€
Most of the cookies that you highlight have benign names and values. For example, the “locale†cookie is simply user’s language and country. I do understand some of the confusion around the ‘act’ and ‘lu’ cookies. The poorly named ‘act’ cookie is a UNIX timestamp with milliseconds and a sequence number that we use to measure and optimize the speed of the site (‘act’ is an abbreviation for “actionâ€). We use the ‘lu’ cookie to identify public computers and discourage the checking of the keep me logged in box. On single user computers, we use the ‘lu’ cookie to prefill your facebook e-mail address on the login screen if you have *not* explicitly logged out.
We also maintain a cookie association between accounts and browsers. This is a key element of our phishing protections. However, contrary to your article, we do delete account-specific cookies when a user logs out of Facebook. As a result, we do not receive personally identifiable cookie information via HTTP Headers when these users browse the web.
Finally, we’ve confirmed that we don’t, and never have, used cookies to suggest friends. If you send us the user IDs of the test accounts you created, I’m happy to investigate further.
Again, my apologies that your previous concerns were not addressed. Since your reports, we’ve introduced a bug bounty program to streamline and reward whitehat security reports (http://www.facebook.com/note.p.... I hope this more secure and reliable channel will be useful for you. We really hope you’ll continue to let us know about issues you see.
I hope these clarifications were helpful. Please let me know if you’d like to discuss further.
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,587
Triptych !LightPenis joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 56 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,630
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,707
@221,583 (I)
I assume you already know that many of Mark Fuckerberg's principles have been criticized for being slanted in favor of a particular stance, but I have something more important to tell you. Two quick comments: 1) Mark's shameless ideals are to politics what the blitzkrieg was to international diplomacy, and 2) I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking about his shenanigans. It's quite likely he will try to retaliate against me for my telling you that his lickspittles acquiesce with bovine stolidity when he instructs them to provide the pretext for police-state measures. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that Mark's ignominious smears often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of ruffianism and Chekism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain.
Whether or not you realize this, time cannot change Mark's behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Mark can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, compromise the free and open nature of public discourse. He had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, Mark gave us antiheroism, fetishism, and denominationalism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since the only morally sound solution is to throw down the gauntlet and challenge Mark's dupes to celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth. Mark vehemently denies that, of course. But he obviously would because I'd peg the odds at about six to one that he will leave us in the lurch quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "establishmentarianism". If I'm wrong, I promise that I'll gladly become increasingly frustrated, humiliated and angry.
The funny thing is, Mark likes beliefs that revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by his uneducated, mischievous tricks. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and punish him for his wishy-washy metanarratives. In closing, we must work together to maintain the great principles of virtue, truth, right, and honor. Together, we can make a difference. Forever and always.
I assume you already know that many of Mark Fuckerberg's principles have been criticized for being slanted in favor of a particular stance, but I have something more important to tell you. Two quick comments: 1) Mark's shameless ideals are to politics what the blitzkrieg was to international diplomacy, and 2) I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking about his shenanigans. It's quite likely he will try to retaliate against me for my telling you that his lickspittles acquiesce with bovine stolidity when he instructs them to provide the pretext for police-state measures. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that Mark's ignominious smears often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of ruffianism and Chekism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain.
Whether or not you realize this, time cannot change Mark's behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Mark can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, compromise the free and open nature of public discourse. He had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, Mark gave us antiheroism, fetishism, and denominationalism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since the only morally sound solution is to throw down the gauntlet and challenge Mark's dupes to celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth. Mark vehemently denies that, of course. But he obviously would because I'd peg the odds at about six to one that he will leave us in the lurch quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "establishmentarianism". If I'm wrong, I promise that I'll gladly become increasingly frustrated, humiliated and angry.
The funny thing is, Mark likes beliefs that revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by his uneducated, mischievous tricks. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and punish him for his wishy-washy metanarratives. In closing, we must work together to maintain the great principles of virtue, truth, right, and honor. Together, we can make a difference. Forever and always.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 9 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,771
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,879
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 19 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,889
@221,771 (I)
Yeah: why lie about what cookies do? You know damn well that they're used to track user habits.
Yeah: why lie about what cookies do? You know damn well that they're used to track user habits.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #221,899
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,149
@221,889 (ltamake !!onnLC5KY8)
Everything I said is true. If you have observed cookies acting contrary to how I have described let me know.
Many people make huge claims about facebook, with no evidence to back them up.
Everything I said is true. If you have observed cookies acting contrary to how I have described let me know.
Many people make huge claims about facebook, with no evidence to back them up.
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,154
@previous (I)
Well, at least I know you're not Pinocchio because if you were your nose would have crashed into your monitor by now.
Either you're a PR person or a very poor troll. Facebook uses the social plugins (like button, comments, like box, etc.) to track you. It's a known fact. Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, and a bunch of other companies do the same thing. You don't need to cover it up by saying "well, the cookies only store this much information about you!".
It's also disturbing that Facebook keeps cookies about me even after I log out. I don't want to be followed all over the internet by some huge company bent on selling my activity to a third party. Fortunately, Facebook Disconnect blocks your stupid plugins so I don't have to see a billion "LIKE THIS ON FACEBOOK" buttons all over news sites.
Well, at least I know you're not Pinocchio because if you were your nose would have crashed into your monitor by now.
Either you're a PR person or a very poor troll. Facebook uses the social plugins (like button, comments, like box, etc.) to track you. It's a known fact. Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, and a bunch of other companies do the same thing. You don't need to cover it up by saying "well, the cookies only store this much information about you!".
It's also disturbing that Facebook keeps cookies about me even after I log out. I don't want to be followed all over the internet by some huge company bent on selling my activity to a third party. Fortunately, Facebook Disconnect blocks your stupid plugins so I don't have to see a billion "LIKE THIS ON FACEBOOK" buttons all over news sites.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,158
@previous (ltamake !!onnLC5KY8)
I asked you to reply if you had evidence of cookies acting contrary to how I described - not to write another unfounded, unverifiable and unproven diatribe.
We welcome real criticism.
I asked you to reply if you had evidence of cookies acting contrary to how I described - not to write another unfounded, unverifiable and unproven diatribe.
We welcome real criticism.
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,160
@previous (I)
Did you even read the OP? The author provided plenty of evidence that Facebook keeps cookies.
Did you even read the OP? The author provided plenty of evidence that Facebook keeps cookies.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 20 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,173
@previous (ltamake !!onnLC5KY8)
Yes I read the OP; my post is a refutation of his claims. I do not deny that facebook keeps cookies; I dispute the nature and intent of these cookies.
You have offered no compelling reason to believe your conspiracy theories about facebook cookies "tracking" users. If you do find proof of such behavior, let me know, I will endeavor to replicate it, and then attempt to have the problem fixed.
Yes I read the OP; my post is a refutation of his claims. I do not deny that facebook keeps cookies; I dispute the nature and intent of these cookies.
You have offered no compelling reason to believe your conspiracy theories about facebook cookies "tracking" users. If you do find proof of such behavior, let me know, I will endeavor to replicate it, and then attempt to have the problem fixed.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,178
Anon I's comments were written by a Facebook engineer, Gregg Stefancik, in response to the article in the OP. While I'm sure Stefancik honestly (and perhaps rightly) believes that Facebook's cookie activity is done with good intentions, it's difficult to take that response seriously as the reasons he gives sound like the same shit PR they always pump out. Old cookies help prevent underage users and spammers from using Facebook and help recover hacked accounts? Really? I suppose it's possible in theory, but it sounds like he's reaching for reasons here.
tripcode joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,181
an interesting discussion, and the details from the original-refuter are technical enough that i am inclined to believe. however i have to wonder WHO cares about cookies? you should be flushing regularly. the _real_ issue here is that the f/b prog's are so lazy and incompetent that they can't deliver the static text and images of their site without running javascript on the visitor's computer. or maybe they just won't. because they're corrupt. f/b's web-code is just shitty. it's unreliable, intrusive, and requires one to have all the bells and whistles turned on.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
ltamake !!onnLC5KY8 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #222,184
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 days later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #225,213
And even if you put all your information to private, your data can still be collected by services that access your Facebook account.
People should just stop using FB and use IRL as an alternative.
People should just stop using FB and use IRL as an alternative.
[^_^] !yyQ9.ZkX3. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #225,215
@previous (P)
I leave everything open. I pretty much give out info freely irl. Well, info that's available on facebook that is
I leave everything open. I pretty much give out info freely irl. Well, info that's available on facebook that is
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #225,224
lol @ strokeface
what an aspie
what an aspie
Anonymous P replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #225,279
thisismypenis !juJc7OReOI double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #225,280
Here's an example of the risks:
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/the-top-4-risks-you-face-when-you-use-facebook/
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/the-top-4-risks-you-face-when-you-use-facebook/
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #225,356
LOL
Facebook Patent Application Describes Receiving Data from Logged-Out Users to Target Ads
The patent describes:
1. A method for tracking information about the activities of users of a social networking system while on another domain, the method comprising:
∙ Maintaining a profile for each of one or more users of the social networking system, each profile identifying a connection to one or more other users of the social networking system and including information about the user;
∙ Receiving one or more communications from a third-party website having a different domain than the social network system, each message communicating an action taken by a user of the social networking system on the third-party website;
∙ Logging the actions taken on the third-party website in the social networking system, each logged action including information about the action; and
∙ Correlating the logged actions with one or more advertisements presented to the one or more users.
oops
Facebook Patent Application Describes Receiving Data from Logged-Out Users to Target Ads
The patent describes:
1. A method for tracking information about the activities of users of a social networking system while on another domain, the method comprising:
∙ Maintaining a profile for each of one or more users of the social networking system, each profile identifying a connection to one or more other users of the social networking system and including information about the user;
∙ Receiving one or more communications from a third-party website having a different domain than the social network system, each message communicating an action taken by a user of the social networking system on the third-party website;
∙ Logging the actions taken on the third-party website in the social networking system, each logged action including information about the action; and
∙ Correlating the logged actions with one or more advertisements presented to the one or more users.
oops
Anonymous R replied with this 15 years ago, 7 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #225,556
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 7 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #225,676
@previous (R)
LOLno This patent pertains to an advertising system.
Not only does this stand in contrast to what some PR shill "engineer" may claim about advertising and tracking, but it also makes Facebook look silly after they just released official statements that they "absolutely don't track users across the web" and that "No information we receive when you see a social plugins is used to target ads."
LOLno This patent pertains to an advertising system.
Not only does this stand in contrast to what some PR shill "engineer" may claim about advertising and tracking, but it also makes Facebook look silly after they just released official statements that they "absolutely don't track users across the web" and that "No information we receive when you see a social plugins is used to target ads."
Anonymous R replied with this 15 years ago, 59 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #225,678
@previous (D)
Yet's it's related to the ads you get on facebook. it's targeted when you like a page, not when you see it.
All of this is obvious. I honestly dont know how you could be so spastic
Yet's it's related to the ads you get on facebook. it's targeted when you like a page, not when you see it.
All of this is obvious. I honestly dont know how you could be so spastic
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #225,683
Anonymous R replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #225,696
Anonymous S joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #225,737
I think the fact Facebook lies routinely and brazenly is far more disturbing than their trying to make a profit. Google doesn't need to bullshit about tracking and they still have plenty of users. I don't get it. What are they trying to hide?
Perhaps they really do support the police state agenda.
Perhaps they really do support the police state agenda.