You just can't finish off Zuckerberg.

“Meta devised an ingenious system (“localhost tracking”) that bypassed Android’s sandbox protections to identify you while browsing on your mobile phone — even if you used a VPN, the browser’s incognito mode, and refused or deleted cookies in every session.”

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    103·
    6 days ago

    32 billion still is nothing for these scumbags

    JAIL MARC ZUCKERBERG ALREADY. That is still what we do with criminals, is it not?

  • mctoasterson@reddthat.com
    6512·
    6 days ago

    Its reliant on running a normie phone and OS, and running the native FB, instagram, or other apps in the Meta constellation. These apps create persistent services that internally backchannel sensitive browser data back to them via internal ports. All browser traffic on devices running these apps should be considered compromised.

    The solution is to run Graphene or other de-googled OS and avoid Meta apps like the plague.

    • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      83·
      6 days ago

      The solution is to have stronger privacy laws.

      If everyone followed your solution then Graphene will become the normie os and Facebook will start targeting it. Choosing an esoteric system for yourself is a good way for a free people to protect their privacy, but it won’t scale.

      When we write our new constitution we need to include privacy as a right.

      • the_abecedarian@piefed.socialOPEnglish
        271·
        6 days ago

        grapheneOS isn’t security through obscurity, they make efforts to harden the phone’s privacy. You’re right that, if it was mainstream, Meta would target it directly though.

        The solution is to remove the profit motive from acquiring, selling, and monetizing our data. Laws alone don’t stop big corps from doing things.

      • unhrpetby@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        31·
        6 days ago

        The solution is to have stronger privacy laws.

        Many people have the power to make certain privacy attacks impossible right now. I consider making that change better for those people than adding a law which can’t stop the behavior, but just adds a negative incentive.

        I wouldn’t wait around for the law to prosecute MITM attacks, I would use end to end encryption.

        Choosing an esoteric system for yourself is a good way for a free people to protect their privacy, but it won’t scale.

        If this is referencing using a barely-used system as a privacy or security protection, then I would regard that as bad protection.

        Everyone using GrapheneOS would be a net security upgrade. All the protections in place wouldn’t just fade away now that Facebook wants to spy on that OS. They’re still in place; Facebook’s job is still harder than it otherwise would be.

        • n0face@lemmy.wtfEnglish
          5·
          6 days ago

          The problem is that GrapheneOS is only available for Pixel devices.

          I really wish they would support other manufacturers, because I don’t really trust Google to make decent hardware (and to be frank, I don’t trust them with anything at all).

          • Little8Lost@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            5 days ago

            I use e/os which is at least de-googled & based on Lineage
            Its not exactly Graphene but it works on 8+ old devices of various manifacturers

            • n0face@lemmy.wtfEnglish
              1·
              5 days ago

              I am very keen to get a Fairphone with e/os next time I switch devices.

              Does it work well with Android Auto? I can’t drive much without a map and my music playlist.

    • Grapho@lemmy.ml
      36·
      6 days ago

      The solution is public execution of at least a few tech CEOs. Then you’ll see how quick the invisible hand of the market seems to stop demanding profit maximization via spyware.

    • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      10·
      5 days ago

      Almost sounds like you’re blaming the user while also not understanding that a de-google phone isn’t the solution because it’s not part of the tracking.

      • uxellodunum@lemmy.mlEnglish
        2·
        5 days ago

        While this is true, it’s worth clarifying that GrapheneOS in particular is able to run apps sandboxed, so they can’t communicate with eachother as they can on a stock OS.

        Having said that, no one should expect that their right to privacy is given (or fought for), unless they take it first. Yes, laws and all, but user education is the bigger issue.

        Users were onboarded onto the Internet before they had an understanding of the differences between cyberspace and meatspace, and how that could affect them. Placing the blame (and solutions) solely on third-parties is a dangerous mistake.

      • mctoasterson@reddthat.com
        1·
        5 days ago

        No, it is Meta and these companies fault, but I focus on things I can actually control. Just spewing the party line default Lemmy opinion of “capitalism is the problem, blah” doesn’t do anything to solve the problem.

        Educating people so they understand how the surveillance works, and explaining that there are alternatives, actually gets us closer to a solution.

  • mle@feddit.org
    33·
    5 days ago

    I think this would warrant to get all websites using the facebook pixel on safe browsing lists and AV databases as infected with malware.

    Maybe then the pressure on meta would be big enough to stop this shit, if all websites stopped to not use that anymore.

    Btw, does anyone know if the localhost tracking is implemented in Whatsapp as well, or just FB and Instagram?

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      4·
      5 days ago

      WhatsApp is owned by Meta, so you should expect that they will do this soon enough if they aren’t doing it already.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        6·
        5 days ago

        I would bet a ton of money on WhatsApp being a spy machine in a way people don’t know yet. Their bullshit of end to end encryption and privacy while being a free app is undoubtedly some ruse to squeeze data out of people. There isn’t a fucking doubt in my mind.

        Facebook is owning and operating a free and private messaging service? To what end? Yeah, nah. Not fuckin buying it.

  • TerHu@lemm.eeEnglish
    25·
    6 days ago

    im wondering, does using uBlock help in any way? can they block metas pixel and thereby protect you?

  • MimicJar@lemmy.world
    5·
    5 days ago

    You’re not affected if (and only if)

    You always used the Brave browser or the DuckDuckGo search engine on mobile

    I found that odd, but reading the more technical write up (linked in the article) it seems Brave blocks localhost communication.

    The Chrome proposal references a single use case. I’ve never seen a website that sets up my local devices, but is this a new thing?

    Why did localhost not get blocked earlier? This seems like a huge hole browsers have ignored for years.

    Also the DuckDuckGo exception doesn’t make sense to me. Does DuckDuckGo have Facebook trackers on it to begin with? Whatever site DuckDuckGo sends you to, if they have the trackers, you’ll get tracked.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.world
        2·
        5 days ago

        I completely forgot that existed! Double checking the technical article they do correctly label it as a browser in their testing matrix/grid.

        I just got confused by the clear “Brave browser” call out. When I hear DuckDuckGo I definitely don’t think browser.

        Good catch!