• patrick@lemmy.jackson.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I highly doubt that they actually managed to do this, at least any time recently.

    As another commenter noted, Android alerts you when an app is accessing the microphone in the background, and it would also absolutely destroy the phones battery life more than the FB app currently does. The only way that we have the “Hey Google/Siri” command prompts active all the time is with custom hardware not available to the apps, and certainly not without Android knowing about it.

    Maybe they actively listen while the app is open, but even then I think recent Android/iOS would let you know about that.

    • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      As someone relatively ignorant about the mechanics of something like this, would it not make more sense that the app would be getting this data from the Android OS, with Google’s knowledge and cooperation?

      The place I see the most unsettling ads (that seem to be driven by overheard conversation) tends to be the google feed itself, so it seems reasonable to me that they could be using and selling that information to others as well, and merely disguising how the data were acquired.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The place I see the most unsettling ads (that seem to be driven by overheard conversation)

        There’s a simpler explanation – you’re in the same geospatial region or you’re connected to the same networks as the people you’re having conversations with, and those people also looked up the things they have conversations about.

        If you have GPS, Wi-Fi, or (possibly) Bluetooth, then that’s how they can pretty easily associate you to those people.

        • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s a reasonable explanation, and what I typically assume to be true. Still, I’m curious about the actual mechanics, and if it potentially could be being done by Google without the larger tech industry being aware of it.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I believe technically-inclined people could monitor the traffic that exits the phone, or at least passes through the router.

            Audio recordings would be larger than the kinds of stuff that’s just sent passively.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It would take a lot of data. On device voice processing is not very advanced. That’s why most voice stuff doesn’t work without a signal.

        • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          That makes sense, but isn’t it assuming they’re processing data on the device? I would expect them to send raw audio back to be processed by Google ad services. Obviously it wouldn’t work without signal either, but that’s hardly a limitation.

          As someone else pointed out, how does the google song recognition work? That’s active without triggering the light indicating audio recording, and is at least processing enough audio data to identify songs.

          • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            If they were sending that much audio back, people would see the traffic. You could record it and send it at a different time, but the traffic would exist somewhere. People have looked and failed to find any evidence of such traffic.

            It’s something that could happen on device in the nearish future if there’s not anything now, but it would probably still be hard to hide.

            • akwd169@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              People have looked and failed to find any evidence of such traffic

              Source? I would like to read about that

              • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Sorry, it’s been long enough and I haven’t saved any of the links, and the keywords are polluted as hell with garbage results. I can’t find anything specific.

              • catloaf@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                You probably won’t find a source about something not happening.

                • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  It’s almost like they were asking about sources for people looking or something.

                  If you’re not going to contribute, why are you wasting people’s time?

    • ChillPill@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Google’s “Now playing” feature constantly listens to what’s going on in the background to show you what songs are playing. They claim this is done with a local database of song “fingerprints”. The feature does not show the microphone indicator because: “…Now Playing is protected by Android’s Private Compute Core…”

      I’m not saying that other, non-google, app do this to my knowledge; but the fact that this is a thing is honestly a bit scary.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Except it’s not Facebook doing this, it’s Cox Media Group.

      • grubbyweasel@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you look at the slideshow, cox media group doesn’t claim to be the ones harvesting the data, only to be processing it using AI to then provide that aggregate information to advertisers. Which makes sense, they literally have no means to directly collect voice data from you

        Also no offense but, I thought lemmy users were a little bit better than this whole “read headline, make assumptions, storm to comments” thing that Reddit loves to do

      • ripripripriprip@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Anecdotally, it’s not even a solution. I’ve run into “coincidental” ads without having the FB app installed (visiting FB via browser).

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Then they’ve installed a root kit on your computer because that’s the only way they could have access to your microphone, the web browser blocks it otherwise.

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Title is basically clickbait given it’s Cox Media Group doing this, not Facebook. They’re partnered with a bunch of companies.

  • gcheliotis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    A market agency claiming they do something of the sort isn’t proof that conversations are being monitored en masse. Security researchers can and probably have tested for this and found no clear, verifiable evidence, otherwise we would have known. Also, this stuff can be blocked at the OS level and I find it hard to imagine (esp. without solid proof) that Google or Apple would jeopardize their reputations to this extent by enabling such unauthorized listening in on users’ conversations.

    Of course it’s good to keep watching this space but we shouldn’t jump to conclusions.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Anybody that’s ever spoken to a salesperson knows that they’re talking out of their arse most of the time, and I doubt this is an exception.

      He’s said this because he thinks that the people he’s talking to will give him more money if he does.

      If it was happening at all you’d have seen proof by now. Like people pulling apps apart and finding proof, not just “I spoke to Bob last week about cameras and now I’m seeing ads for cameras”.

      The truly terrifying part is they don’t need to listen to your conversations to know what you want.

            • InternetPerson@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              The evidence is: among other things, facebook has repeatedly violated user’s privacy. It would be no surprise if they would also monitor conversations via the microphone. Sure, currently there seems to be no evidence for that. But I wouldn’t be so naive to just trust them on that.

                • InternetPerson@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  This is not evidence that they’re using your microphone, and you know it’s not.

                  I didn’t claim it to be evidence for that.

                  somehow bypassing Google and Apple’s mic usage notifications

                  Unless some form of hardware notification is hardwired into the device, which indicates cam or mic usage, I’m on the rather paranoid side regarding software notifications. Software is usually much easier to break. I’m leaning a lot out of the window now, as I don’t know how secure those notifications are implemented. However, even then there is reason for concern, given that facebook had / has questionable deals with device manufacturers. If they were willing to share personal data with device manufacturers, there is reason to suspect this went or can go the other way around as well.

                  I don’t know why you keep coming back to trust. […] That’s not the point.

                  It is mine. Even though there is no evidence for a surveillance using device microphones itself yet and it could be surprising if they were able to, given the history of facebook, they participated in a lot of rather surprising shit.

      • dev_null@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        By paying people $20 / month in exchange for installing a VPN that will snoop on your data so they can market research their competitors.

        It is unacceptable, but it wasn’t in secret from the users. They agreed to get paid in exchange for the usage data of competitor apps.

        So it’s a completely different situation to any “secretly spying” claim. The users had to go out of their way to get it setup.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They have it’s very easy there are free programs that monitor all data traffic.

      This claim that Facebook listens to you on your phone has been around for years. It has been investigated numerous times and has never turned out to be true. Until recently the processing capacity required would have been insane and you would have an incredibly high noise to signal ratio. It’s just not an economical way of gathering data for advertising.

      Why bother anyway when people put their entire lives on Facebook, for free, in easily processable text?

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Because people’s (presumed private) conversations on Messenger are not the same thing as things people post publicly.

        Personally, I would never install that malware on my phone. But if you even have FB Messenger installed on your device, chances are that it’s constantly sending your data to Facebook. Go take a look at what permissions it “needs.”

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          We can see what it’s sending to facebook though, and it’s not constant. There’s a bunch that it does send and receive, but this isn’t hypothetical speculation, like, we can just see that it’s not using your microphone for that, or sending anything like audio data. You can check this yourself, wireshark is free and packet specifications are available.

      • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Your phone/plan carrier using voice data to make a marketing profile is well documented actually. This data is purchased and verified and resold by meta, or in some cases bought and used by alphabet for GAS. Cacti can show you outgoing data for every device on a network, and you can see data being sent from a phone in signed packets going to your carrier when you’re not “actively using” it. It seems like you know about network monitoring tools but you haven’t actually used them, just talked about them in reference to data collection.

        “Why buy the cow” here is also easily answered: not everyone uses Facebook, a fair number of users will deactivate their facebook page but continue to use messenger.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          And you have yet to provide any evidence for your belief.

          I want evidence please provide me evidence or shut the hell up because all you’re doing is perpetuating a prejudice against Facebook, which isn’t unjustified, but is totally without any kind of basis in reality.

        • Xatolos@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          So what you’re saying is the biggest companies like Amazon, Google, ChatGPT, etc… can’t perfect voice dictation when I’m talking directly and clearly to my device, but this company has been able to figure it out. And doing it while hiding from the smartphone OS that it’s doing it. While the device is at a distance/hidden in my pocket. And is using it just to sell ads.

          👍

            • dev_null@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yeah, with lots of leaked customer data. Nothing about using voice data to make a marketing profile. Unless there is a second leak I don’t know about.

              But judging by your inability to link it you just made it up.

  • oweka@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    For everyone saying apps need permission to use your mic I want to point you to “play services”. The permissions protections only apply to user space apps not system apps. Thats how u can say “OK google” and get the chat ai to pop up even tho its “not listening” according to the OS.

    Also if you read the website they are not piping audio to their servers. They push triggers (keywords, etc) to the local ai on your phone that listens for things like “OK google” and then sends those reports back.

    Meta apps would need permission to to mic but I think if y’all check your big tech apps u will be surprised how many have that permission.

    I can’t speak to iOS because its closed source but it probably has similar backdoors for apple.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s the last “bombshell scandal that would ruin a company” that actually ruined a company?

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Unroll.me was a service that would scan your email and clean up your inbox. The New York Times reported that the company was gathering sales receipts emails, anonymizing them, and selling them to rival companies; for example Uber paid them to hand over all the sales receipts they could on Lyft rides in people’s mailboxes. The bad press made them eventually sell the company to Slice, mainly for the email archives they amassed.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        As a business you can be a maverick against many laws, just not the laws regarding finance.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Cambridge Analytica, but only because what they were doing was so monumentally illegal. I’m sure the government would have let them get away with it if they could have thought of a way out for them. A lot of them mates were involved in that scandal.

  • FlavoredButtHair@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is why I don’t have the Facebook app installed. However, what about messenger? Did the collect the data from messenger?

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah that’s a shame, electronics seems to have reached a level where most people just don’t need or dream of a better something (PC, phone, etc) and other tech is hard to grasp like biotech.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The future is going to be amazing! Well, it has the potential to be amazing if we use tech the right way. No I mean, like in an ethical way. Without exploiting people. No not like that, in a way that helps people. Well yes, billionaires are people, but I meant… at least it should be in legal ways. Or at least policed. Not hostile to average people. Not an openly criminal endeavour. Maybe just dont criminalise resistance to it? … oh, actually the future is going to be a techno-monopolistic dark age, I see. We can pivot to covering that.

  • AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    There were whole threads of people saying this stuff doesn’t happen. They would say it just didn’t make sense that companies would do this, it’s not worth it to them. That all the ads I was seeing at convenient times were just a coincidence.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      There are simps in this thread trying to say “uuuuhmmmm AKSHUALLY it’s not Facebook directly” like that’s fucking relevant to the problem.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Right and your evidence is “I think it happens”.

      Show me the stack trace.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      And they are right. This company is full of shit. Show me any proof the tech from the deleted advert actually existed.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re here in this thread lol. No matter what, these people will deny its happening. I don’t understand it.

    • vxx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I have my camera and microphone deactivated on the OS level because Youtube and Spotify would show me things workmates mentioned way too often.

      I didn’t notice it since.

      Could still be a major coincidence though, the biggest of them.

    • PrimeMinisterKeyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The next iteration of gaslighting is already here: That it’s no big deal anyway since you can just use an ad blocker. Riiight, let’s all just turn our eyes away to make the monster go away. Surely, it’ll get bored and stop listening and recording, and surely, it will not sell its collected data off to banks, insurance providers, the government, law enforcement… right?

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Seriously… If ad-blockers worked at a high enough level to actually impact this shit, then they wouldn’t be doing it. They know most people don’t bother with ad blockers, and because of that, they’re low-hanging fruit.

  • homesnatch@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It is pretty easy to verify whether you’ve granted Microphone access to Facebook. If you have, revoke it.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem with closed source apps is you don’t know what else is going on in the background and what else it might have installed or connected to, unless you have debug logs for everything it did and know how to interpret all of that. I wouldn’t install any app from the facebook company on any device I use

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m pretty sure that iPhone have the same security but on Android, apps cannot install other apps. When you think about it that would be a pretty basic security vulnerability so it’s not that surprising that it’s blocked.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not Facebook though, it’s just used in the clickbait headline as an advertising partner of the actual company the story is about.

      But if you need to revoke the microphone permission from the Facebook app then something is wrong anyway, because it means you have the Facebook app installed for some reason.

  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    At this point it doesn’t even matter if it’s real or not, after Snowden no sane person believes big tech since they were all in on PRISM.

    • AJ1@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      yeah like tell me something I don’t know.

      “This just in: to the surprise of no one, your phone has, in fact, been spying on you from day 1. Now we go to Jim with sports. Jim?”

      • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        tell me something I don’t know

        My grandad said “It’s really humid today isn’t it?”

        I said “Tell me something I don’t know!”

        He said “Err… Ok… I can fit my whole fist up yer gran’s arse”

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Dildos, lots of dildos! I’m just gonna repeat that while I’m driving to see if I start getting Google ads for dildos.