This is overly harsh. The spokesperson assumed they were being accused of abusing their position of running the SAT by actually sending real SAT scores directly to Facebook, so they responded accordingly.

Instead they were abusing their position of trust to get students to enter the scores again themselves and sending that. Still not great, but not a lie on the spokesperson's part, just a misunderstanding of what was meant.

They lied.

No, they didn't, they responded to the question they thought they were being asked. The form fields on their college search page weren't even in their working memory at the time.

This is a case of the College Board negligently failing to recognize these fields as sensitive data, not a case of them outright lying. Still bad, obviously, but stupid rather than nefarious.

So if they are this stupid, why are they trusted to administer these tests?

I think they shouldn't be, but that's a separate question from whether this spokesperson lied.

it's kind of like a developer saying: "not on my browser"

At best it's incompetence/lack of due diligence.

Yeah, often companies will make that kind of claim based on the fact they only pass around sha256 hashes of email addresses, which are trivially deanonymized.

https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2018/04/09/four-cents-to-deano...

Now imagine this being used by employers to weed out candidates.

Or advertisers, to target the "least intelligent" with their campaigns. (Which I'm sure they already do by proxy.)

While employers can't generally request SAT scores from the College Board, they can already request candidates to provide them if they want to.

Already seems to be happening but much more upfront. In recent months, I've had two potential employers require I take a "personality" test but only about a quarter of the questions were personality/character attribute based, the rest were clearly intelligence questions, mostly recognizing patterns and testing memory. Tech companies have been pushing the limits of the "directly related to the job" exemption allowed by the Duke Power v Griggs decision for years. Looks like some are ready to simply ignore that court ruling entirely.