How about the ones they agreed to with the FTC in 2011 [1][2]?
[1] https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/2011...
[2] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/11/faceb...
Basically, FB should introduce an App-Engine like platform where the backend of any 3rd-party application that uses FB data has to run on FB-owned servers. Developers of these applications would then ship their code to FB (similar to Heroku) and run in a sandboxed environment where they are not allowed to take data out at all.
That way FB can audit how the data is being used at anytime and kick out people who are out of compliance with their terms. If a user deletes their FB account, now all their data could be deleted from any 3rd party applications automatically. This is basically similar to the way the government handles classified data.
Or perhaps their could be a limited capability for developers to log in to their app as another user of it, but those accesses would be logged and periodically audited (just like the as-another-user-logins of regular FB engineers are).
+--------------+ +----------+ +--------------+
| | | | | |
| other server | | Server | | other server |
| | | | | |
+-------+------+ +----+-----+ +-------+------+
^ | ^
| | |
| http request |
| containing user |
| data for UI |
http request made | rouge http request
with a legit purpose | sending the user data
say fetching assets v to some other server
| +-------+-------+ |
| | | |
+------------+ mobile app +--------------+
| |
+---------------+
1. can facebook do this? Apple could; they approve apps and get the binary/manifest before the app is released. But how could Facebook enforce this?
2. would developers be ok with this? Relying 100% on facebook?
It is an option, I'm not saying it's infeasible. An interesting idea for sure, thanks for sharing!
All of this tends to trade one problem for another, though: the user no longer has to worry that the third-party app has access to their Facebook data. But now the user has to worry that Facebook has access to their third-party app data.
2) Developers simply wouldn't have a a choice in the matter - FB is so big that they can force the market in a certain direction if they want to.
This is the status quo as of the 2014 platform policy changes.
The entire debacle is around the data retrieved (and saved) prior to that, which is what Cambridge Analytics has done.
> Or perhaps their could be a limited capability for developers to log in to their app as another user of it
FB Developer app has support for test users, who are marked as such.
Would that work for mobile apps?
This is even before we get into trust issues most developers would have with Facebook having access to their user data.
Most would be correct - some flows like inviting friends to an app, or showing friends who also happen to use this app (for games, etc.) are so common that they're integrated into the Facebook SDK.
For performance reasons (both on Facebook's end and for the sake of user's experience, just in case his phone moved into a zone with inferior coverage) a fat network request was preferred to multitude of thin small ones - you couldn't really predict when the user would fancy inviting their friends, saving their score, looking at their achievements, or checking out friends who are in same town as them - so a 24-hour cache policy was instituted.
> we immediately banned Kogan's app from our platform, and demanded that Kogan and Cambridge Analytica formally certify that they had deleted all improperly acquired data. They provided these certifications.
To generalize the issue, if you were in charge of APIs at some company A and some company B (not necessarily located in your jurisdiction and not necessarily subject to the same legislative framework as you) told you they used to have the data, but deleted it since then, what additional measures would you recommend company A pursue?
Zuck's announcement seems to have a decent outline -- start with investigating apps with access to large amounts of data, audit apps with strange behavior. But after a year, after the CA (and other) controversies are forgotten, what I was thinking was that FB should be doing regular, random audits/investigations, and publicize the punishment.
I don't mean identifiable shaming, e.g. "Last week, we banned Jane Smith and her Flappy Farm app for misusing the data of 3,000+ users". But maybe weekly/monthly tallies of apps that were shut down or sanctioned, and a breakdown of the reasons why, and users affected, etc. Every once in awhile, an app maker might post a "We Fucked Up" article on HN, which helps even more in reminding people of TOS.
There's really no way to check if someone has made a copy of data if you've given them that data.
It's not that hard to check if an application prompts a user for an email address.
* someone used Facebook Connect to login to NYTimes Web site, curious about their Food & Recipes newsletter, wants to sign up
* someone logging into e-commerce shop through Facebook Connect, making a purchase and then deciding that yes, they would like to track and manage their order on the retailer's Web site, and they will even sign up for an account with retailer to do that
I think the only sane response would be to shut down the developer program. I doubt it contributes much to the FB bottomline and it's clearly something FB doesn't care much about given the breadth of this scandal.
At the very start of Facebook platform the API would anonymize the user's email address, the app would get an app-specific hash, e.g. [email protected] It was a working email address with Facebook handling the forwarding.
This proved futile as the very first thing that apps then did was to ask users for their real email address.