• Distribution Scope, Security, and Useful Tools

    November 14, 2011 • Privacy • 0 Comments

    While working on the Facebook Privacy Informer App, we had to tackle the issue of “Scope of Distribution” of your personal information. Actually, this should be more properly named as “Scope of (Intended) Distribution”. Facebook privacy controls allow you to set the distribution of various aspects of your Facebook profile. In general, the controls allow you to set distribution to:

    • (The inappropriately named) “Only Me”
    • A subset of your friends,
    • Your friends
    • Groups that you belong to
    • The general public

    Why does Facebook say “Only Me” when you share information with Facebook? Shouldn’t the setting be labeled, “Only Facebook (and whoever they decide to share it with)?”. Even when you spend the time to tune those controls, there will certainly be leakage of your information beyond your intended settings.

    Facebook has enough money that you would think your biggest issues would be their intended privacy violations (sales of tracking ads) and your own privacy control lapses (friending people you don’t personally know). Unfortunately that’s not really true. There is a 1 in 4 chance that your account will be hacked this year. Given the information that Facebook acknowledges it holds about you, and other information it won’t tell you about, that’s somewhat alarming. With all that information, and many examples of leaky security, what happens when the almost inevitable major breach occurs?

    Still… Facebook is a very useful and entertaining service for many of us. So the issue is not how fast we run away from it, but how we control our risk to value ratio. The Privacy Informer Apps that DataBanker is creating are intended to provide feedback on your risk and strategies for reducing that risk.

    The DataBanker Privacy Informer for Facebook app is currently in development and has had limited demos. One of the issues we had to incorporate into our risk scoring strategy was Facebook’s distribution scope controls. Once we added that factor to our scoring model, we saw that it could also be used to incorporate security and reputation risks into the scoring. An example of a security issue is when Facebook says that it will only share information with your friends, but then one of your friend’s account gets hacked. A reputation issue is when Facebook gives you control over some information, but then hides other information about you that it intends to monetize. In both cases, there is an expansion of scope beyond the limit your settings indicated. In the DataBanker model, if you set that level to be “Friends”, we adjust our risk value calculation to include some leakage to the public.

    That adjustment begs the question, how does one know how much to tweak the value? That’s where some interesting tools and data sources can provide value.

    TACO by Abine and Ghostery created browser add-ons that show you the tracking cookies that a website is using, and allow you to set the one you want to block.

    Privacy Choice provides a database of tracking cookies, and information about both the cookie and the organization behind the cookie that help to quantify the reputation and risk of each cookie.  Privacy Choice also provides tools for safe surfing and privacy policy creation and analysis. That’s very useful information for web surfers, web developers and others making tools for a safer web.

    Web of Trust takes the problem of creating reputation scores and crowd-sources it. It provides a browser add-on that in real time shows what others think of the website you viewing, and allows you to contribute your own rating.

    Taken together, these tools and the databases behind them inform algorithms that apply both mathematically derived and experiential data to the problem of assigning a reputation score to a website. We then use that reputation score to adjust the intended distribution scope variable. In the end, we provide a simple numeric value that relates to your privacy risk, along with information on those factors that stand out as being riskiest.

    That’s a little view of what we’re working on now and in the future. Tell us what you think about it.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Current ye@r *