Vinice's Reflection

It was a news released in July 2010, reporting that the privacy setting of Facebook was unreliable. It was pointed out because an employee of a firm Skull Security had complied and released the personal data on more than a hundred users. The Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained that the information which were available to access were those enable people to find each friend, which was the reason people joininng Facebook. Although the CEO had made this statement, those companiees and organizations that co-operated with Facebook, had also downloaded the file. On one hand, they were curious to see if their names were on the list, on the other hand they were interested to see whether the information would help them target advertising and outreach efforts, say privacy advocates. it means, after this incident happened, users' Facebook might be more public and they would then receive more advertisments.

Mark Zuckerberg said the reson people joining Facebook was because they could look for others, including the old or ‘missing’ friends. However, I believed that there is a number of Facebook users’ do not realized how widely their data were being shared. In addition, most people were under the impression that when set the ‘privacy setting’, they would not change. Nevertheless, Facebook itself would change the privacy setting automatically. In the summer of 2009, the setting changed twice in this period. Both times, some of users’ privacy settings had defaulted back to the public options. In this case, do the Facebook users have to check the private setting frequently, for example, half a year? Would all people immediately know the setting being rectified?

Fortunately, it is pleased that there are security firms or privacy advocates concern the issue in order to protect the public. Once they have discovered something wrong, they would sooner or later report to the journalists. The Facebook claimed that it would not disclose personal data to others unless the companies were registered and being permitted by Facebook. So, it means that the users’ data would not be widely shared but it would be a part of computational advertising. Hence, the regulations of this online community was really blur and vulnerable. This news may be just an iceberg. Therefore, it would be better to set up an authority or designate a Bureau to monitor all online communities as they utilize the client’s data, and to request them to tighten up their regulations. People once access online would be shared their data indeed. Thus, it is a part of user’s responsibility to protect their personal information, too. There are much more fibbers on the net. Actually, netizens have to take necessary precautions by themselves.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/new-economy/2010/0730/Privacy-issues-hit-Facebook-again