• Yeah but…

    Facebook achieved their MITM attack by selling a VPN with spyware in it.

    And so you have to wonder: who in his right mind would buy a VPN service from effing Facebook of all companies? It’s like asking the KKK to do the catering at your bar mitzvah: if you have a problem with the service, you kind of asked for it.

  • The project was part of the company’s In-App Action Panel (IAPP) program, which used a technique for “intercepting and decrypting” encrypted app traffic from users of Snapchat, and later from users of YouTube and Amazon, the consumers’ lawyers wrote in the document.

    Looks like they didn’t decrypt anything, just used MitM spyware.

  • Why the hell do they even let them operate anymore? Spying on people. That’s one of the most illegal things you can fucking do to a person, save bodily harm. Even law enforcement needs a damn permit for it.

    • They have money. Period. End of discussion. Money equals do what you want. Having “fuck you” money equals do what you want to whoever you want without consequence.

      This is the world we live in and it’s not going to change while half of an entire country’s voting body is willing to elect an insurrectionist that’s guilty of rape among ninety some-odd other things.

      Best to just accept this and look inward to you and your own and do your best to keep those things happy and healthy.

  • This is the best summary I could come up with:


    In 2016, Facebook launched a secret project designed to intercept and decrypt the network traffic between people using Snapchat’s app and its servers.

    On Tuesday, a federal court in California released new documents discovered as part of the class action lawsuit between consumers and Meta, Facebook’s parent company.

    “Whenever someone asks a question about Snapchat, the answer is usually that because their traffic is encrypted we have no analytics about them,” Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg wrote in an email dated June 9, 2016, which was published as part of the lawsuit.

    When the network traffic is unencrypted, this type of attack allows the hackers to read the data inside, such as usernames, passwords, and other in-app activity.

    This is why Facebook engineers proposed using Onavo, which when activated had the advantage of reading all of the device’s network traffic before it got encrypted and sent over the internet.

    “We now have the capability to measure detailed in-app activity” from “parsing snapchat [sic] analytics collected from incentivized participants in Onavo’s research program,” read another email.


    The original article contains 671 words, the summary contains 175 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • It’s a proprietary platform … what do people expect?

    It’s visiting someone’s business and you are in their property and you are watching TV on their TV set. You are reading newspapers and books that are on their property. And everyone acts surprised when the property owner keeps track of what you watched and what you read on their property.

    You have no rights to do anything on their property … other than the rights they give you, which they can also take away, or just kick you out.

    • …what?

      This was one company spying on the users of its competitor via unofficial means. Even in the furthest stretch of the corporate boot licking bullshit that “you signed up for the app so you deserve to be spied on” exists in, I don’t see how this scenario is covered.

      •  ZeroCool   ( @ZeroCool@slrpnk.net ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        This is just typical Lemmy. User doesn’t read the article but has very strong opinions based on what they imagine it to be about. Comment gets upvoted by a bunch of other users who also didn’t read the article but imagine they know what happened too. Rinse and repeat.

    •  ZeroCool   ( @ZeroCool@slrpnk.net ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s a proprietary platform … what do people expect?

      It’s visiting someone’s business and you are in their property and you are watching TV on their TV set. You are reading newspapers and books that are on their property. And everyone acts surprised when the property owner keeps track of what you watched and what you read on their property.

      You have no rights to do anything on their property … other than the rights they give you, which they can also take away, or just kick you out.

      Are you under the impression that Facebook owns Snapchat? Because they don’t. Nothing about this little “blame people for using proprietary services” rant is actually relevant to what happened. At all.

      You should read the article because you clearly didn’t. Hell, all you’d have to do is read the first paragraph to understand they were spying on the users of a competitor.

    •  4am   ( @4am@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I think you are thinking of Instagram. Facebook doesn’t own Snapchat.

      Oh it’s Onavo. Onavo was the “Facebook VPN” software they shuttered in 2019. So it had access to network traffic on-device before it was sent out.

      Seems like it was more than a VPN, and put its claws deep into the network stack if it was reading packet buffers before they were encrypted. Not good; I’m sure that users were not made aware of this but in light of this possibility, your point stands.

  •  Conyak   ( @Conyak@lemmy.tf ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    How many times is Facebook going to be caught doing this kind of shit before some real action is taken? They clearly can’t be trusted. Let’s add them to the same TikTok ban at this point.