The Sins of Meta (formerly Facebook)

Many people find WhatsApp, Instagram or Facebook great. However, they don't know or don't want to know that they are using the platforms of a company that manipulates elections, spies on users and even competitors. Even against the advice of their own lawyers, laws are disregarded simply because it could be strategically advantageous for the market. A list of some of Meta's transgressions against humanity.

Introduction

Over the years, Facebook and Meta have accumulated so many offenses, crimes, and massive, widespread violations of the privacy of unsuspecting users of Meta platforms that at least a summary of these sins seems appropriate.

Because there are so many sins, they can only be represented in an arbitrary selection.

Meta rebranded itself from Facebook, likely also to wash away the bad reputation. Meta operates several platforms. These platforms include in particular:

• Facebook Social Media
• Facebook Messenger (standalone app)
• WhatsApp
• Instagram

With all these platforms, something can go wrong, whether intentionally or unintentionally. In the end, the fools are always the users whose data flows away. "But I have nothing to hide!" say some, who perhaps don't have enough imagination. These people forget: everyone is influenciable, whether by advertising, political messages or opinion-making.

This also shows the first example of massive wrongdoing by then Facebook, now Meta. It's thought-provoking that many people seem completely indifferent when the operator of a platform they use daily is considered criminal. Whitewashing only helps to a limited extent and is becoming increasingly difficult.

Own Understanding of Affected Persons Rights

First, Meta improperly requested consent for the use of user data on Facebook and Instagram. Then, Meta introduced a "Pay or OK" model, which was frequently criticized: "Pay 10,000 euros and you don't have to see ads, or give us all your data." Never was the decision easier (completely leave Meta).

Recently, Meta wants to use all user data (except for private messages, supposedly) for AI training. For this, Meta generously offers a right of objection. However, this right of objection is first checked and only granted if Meta's review is successful in the user's favor. The user must welcome their objection… Because that's what Meta wants.

Specifically, Meta writes this in an email to all Facebook users: To be able to offer you these usage experiences, we will in the future rely on the legal basis of legitimate interest when we use your information to further develop and improve AI at Meta. This means that you have a right to object to how your information is used for these purposes. If your objection is granted, it will be taken into account in the future. Users must acknowledge the objection to Meta: See screenshot of Meta's form for everyone who dares to file an objection:

The development of that project was stopped by Meta on June 14, 2024, after the data protection organization noyb lodged an objection. What would have happened if this non-profit organization had not been there?

Widespread infringement of copyright

The information was spread by the New York Times and reached me through the plaintiff (Thomas Heldrup) in the case against Meta. The case was published on April 6, 2024.

Cut short: "OpenAI, Google and Meta ignored company policies, changed their own rules and discussed circumventing copyright laws as they searched for online information to train their latest artificial intelligence systems."

Somewhat longer:

Meta allegedly used copyrighted content from the internet on a large scale to train its LLaMA-generation AI language models, despite its own lawyers warning about the legal issues.

Probably, LLAMA was made open-source because Meta, while criminal, is not stupid. Because if an AI generates text based on copyrighted works, these cannot be used publicly without significant risk. Meta is now making this problem the problem of everyone by releasing the AI model.

There was already an admission of copyright infringement, particularly by OpenAI.

Cambridge Analytica

Everyone who likes Donald Trump, please leave this blog now and don't read it anymore. These people have a reason to like Facebook.

Because Facebook, at the time, had, together with Google and a received advertising budget of one million dollars per day, identified undecided voters from the mass of the many millions of users on Facebook's and Google's platforms. These undecided voters were then targeted ("Targeting") bombarded with advertising messages, until they hopefully found Donald Trump more appealing than before, and then voted for Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton, whom they might otherwise have chosen instead.

For example, you can see this in the documentary Cambridge Analytica. If you're already at it, you can also look up information about Google right away. The documentary about them is called The Billion Dollar Code. Google was already bad about 30 years ago. Who came up with the motto "Don't be evil"? The one who wants to do good or the one who wants to prevent themselves from causing harm?

WhatsApp collects personal data on a large scale.

"Scraping" in this context means that Meta takes personal data without legal grounds, therefore also without consent and often even without the knowledge of users, and uses it for its own purposes of making money. The American intelligence services regularly rejoice over this treasure trove of data.

The Irish data protection authority, which otherwise never takes action (because of tax revenues in Ireland), has even deigned to impose a paltry fine of 223 million euros on Meta because WhatsApp, firstly, processes data completely opaquely and secondly, is already illegally doing so.

Hopefully, you have never accidentally come into contact with a criminal or someone suspected of being a criminal, or someone who was at the same disco or bar as a criminal at the same time. Because otherwise, there could be a problem with your next entry into the USA. I don't know the methods and possibilities of US intelligence agencies outside the USA. Surely some WhatsApp users will have gathered more experience in this regard.

WhatsApp is insecure

Former WhatsApp security chief Attaullah Baig pursues legal action against Meta over neglected cybersecurity vulnerabilities (source).

Main accusations according to court documents:

• Unrestricted data access for several thousand Meta/WhatsApp employees to confidential user information (avatars, GPS data, address books)
• Compromise of more than 100,000 user accounts daily without effective protective measures
• Rejection of recommended security patches by corporate leadership
• Employment sanctions and termination following escalation to Meta board

Baig accuses Meta of violating the 2019 FTC privacy agreement as well as securities regulations. Parallel reports to FTC and SEC have already been filed.

Supreme Court Rulings Against Facebook Fan Pages and Plugins

The ECJ ruled some time ago that Facebook Fanpages are problematic. See judgment against the Wirtschaftsakademie Schleswig-Holstein (CJEU-Judgment of 05.06.2018 – C‑210/16).

Unfortunately, the Facebook Pixel is used by many as an advertising tool. If a user visits a website and then later goes on Facebook, they will be shown ads for the website they previously visited. This is called retargeting.

The CJEU ruled in the case against Fashion ID that joint liability exists between the website operator (who integrates the Facebook plugin out of stupidity or malice and indifference, often also already unlawful because not legitimized) and Facebook. See CJEU judgment of 29.07.2019 – C‑40/17.

Facebook shares user data with third-party companies ("partners")

Partners on Facebook are not contractors, but rather any companies that are strategic partners. Like your neighbor, with whom you jointly evade taxes when you funnel large sums of black money to him.

See for example the confidential court filing in the case against Facebook or the New York Times article.

Facebook had even admitted to this, but downplayed it. It was supposedly necessary to share user data with Netflix, Microsoft, or other partners. After all, that's how the Facebook Messenger could be integrated into Netflix and other platforms. They conveniently forgot to mention that completely unnecessary and purely marketing-driven data exchanges also took place. For example, Microsoft could see the friend lists of chat users without any consent from any affected user.

Security loophole in two-factor authentication

A security breach is not intentional. If your personal data, such as the PIN exchanged with your partner, sexual preferences, or even intimate photos, end up with unknown, unauthorized third parties (mostly criminals), then you are hopefully not happy about it.

If a person is affected by data misuse, it doesn't matter to them whether it was due to a security flaw at Instagram or intentional action by Meta.

Two-factor authentication (2FA) is intended to enhance security through a media break. However, this very feature led to a security problem on Instagram and Facebook, particularly for users who used the same login on both platforms. Meta supported this same login (is it still supported?) to make it even easier for users to hand over their data.

The original source is not readily available. However, here and here are reports from users who had the problem. One of the reports is from December 2023, so very recent. Here is a source that describes a possible method used by hackers.

Unfortunately, there was no limit on the number of allowed attempts to enter a four-digit code sent via SMS as a second factor when a password was forgotten. This meant that anyone technically savvy could simply try all possible codes and thus take over the account of a stranger. It was not necessary to have previously compromised the other user.

Conclusion

Use the functionally equivalent Signal instead of WhatsApp. Delete your account beforehand. Meta doesn't want that, which is why it takes several minutes. Just that alone shows how criminal Meta is.

Instead of using Facebook, spend your time more meaningfully. Logging off Facebook requires a guide, which I have therefore provided. If you cannot remove yourself as a customer from a German company or only after 30 minutes, how do you find that? Would you still want to have any contact with this company then? A life without WhatsApp is another important step for everyone who doesn't want to be manipulated or made dependent. Good friends also switch to Signal or SMS (or phone or email or face-to-face meetings) sometimes.

Companies don't need a Facebook Fanpage. A website is sufficient, which can then be designed as desired. Completely independent of Facebook and without data protection issues, for which the Fanpage operators are responsible.

However, many people still drive VW or other cars from this group, even though the illegal shutdown device in VW diesels shows that VW is also criminal or at least was. Numerous passenger cars from foreign car manufacturers are (unfortunately) better and cheaper than those from the VW Group. But who wants to spend less money for something better? Habit triumphs over people who let everything happen to them. That's intrinsically stupid. Stupid doesn't mean someone is generally stupid. But stupidity can also be partially present.