亚色在线观看_亚洲人成a片高清在线观看不卡_亚洲中文无码亚洲人成频_免费在线黄片,69精品视频九九精品视频,美女大黄三级,人人干人人g,全新av网站每日更新播放,亚洲三及片,wwww无码视频,亚洲中文字幕无码一区在线

Facebook很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間以來沒有這類重大好消息了。這次是與隱私保護(hù)有關(guān),。不妨關(guān)注一下這個(gè)“專注于隱私保護(hù)的Facebook,！”

不,，還是算了吧,。在Facebook最近發(fā)布的“專注于社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)隱私保護(hù)”的愿景中,，馬克·扎克伯格的表述從很多方面來看根本不是為了提倡隱私保護(hù),。

這并非是說Facebook沒有采取隱私保護(hù)限制舉措,。通過專注于一對(duì)一或小群組的信息發(fā)送,，公司將更注重確保非大范圍網(wǎng)絡(luò)人群對(duì)話的隱私保護(hù),。通過使用強(qiáng)大的加密技術(shù)——已經(jīng)成為了WhatsApp的默認(rèn)配置以及Facebook Messenger的可選配置,，政府難以獲悉溝通的內(nèi)容,，當(dāng)然,，F(xiàn)acebook自身也無法窺探,。

但扎克伯格的貼文實(shí)際上是有關(guān)WhatsApp,、Facebook Messenger和Instagram基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的整合,，而此舉對(duì)于隱私來說可謂是莫大的侵犯。

第一個(gè)問題：很多人都已經(jīng)注冊(cè)了相繼被Facebook收購(gòu)的WhatsApp和Instagram,，但他們并不希望其信息融入Facebook這個(gè)大網(wǎng)絡(luò),。

確實(shí),，如果Facebook收購(gòu)WhatsApp一事出現(xiàn)在歐洲,，F(xiàn)acebook并不會(huì)這么做,。圍繞收購(gòu)WhatsApp一事，該公司因誤導(dǎo)反壟斷監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)被罰1.22億美元。德國(guó)的市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)主管機(jī)構(gòu)已經(jīng)就Facebook最新的整合舉措向其發(fā)出警告,，如果這一舉措未能得到用戶明確的自愿同意,，那么在歐盟內(nèi)開展整合舉措就是違法的,。

很明顯,，F(xiàn)acebook各類信息發(fā)送服務(wù)的整合將允許人們進(jìn)行跨平臺(tái)溝通,。雖然此舉能夠提升溝通便利度，但也會(huì)允許Facebook為其用戶建立更加精準(zhǔn)的個(gè)人檔案,，并將其用于廣告定位,。

盡管扎克伯格也提到了強(qiáng)大的加密技術(shù)在安全保障方面的優(yōu)勢(shì),，但受惠的對(duì)象僅限于人們發(fā)送的信息,，并非與之相關(guān)的元數(shù)據(jù)，而且Facebook可以從這些數(shù)據(jù)中獲悉交談雙方的信息以及時(shí)間,。這些都是異常寶貴的建檔信息，也就是肖珊娜·佐伯芙所謂的“監(jiān)控資本主義”的動(dòng)力源,。

在文章中描述加密技術(shù)時(shí)，扎克伯格提出的論據(jù)根本經(jīng)不起推敲,。他曾經(jīng)放出豪言：“在我去年與持反對(duì)意見的人進(jìn)行交流時(shí)，他們提到加密技術(shù)是自己能夠獲得自由,，甚至是活著的原因,。”Facebook剛剛被人曝光使用用戶為增強(qiáng)其賬戶安全所提交的電話號(hào)碼,，并借此提升網(wǎng)絡(luò)辨識(shí)這些用戶的便利度,。

他繼續(xù)說道：“加密技術(shù)對(duì)于隱私保護(hù)來說是一個(gè)強(qiáng)有力的工具，但它也保護(hù)了不法分子的隱私,。我們正努力偵測(cè)活動(dòng)模式或其他方式,，即便是看不到信息內(nèi)容，也要在各個(gè)應(yīng)用中提升我們識(shí)別和阻止破壞分子的能力,，哪怕看不到信息內(nèi)容也會(huì)這樣做,。我們也將繼續(xù)在這一領(lǐng)域進(jìn)行投資?！贝送?，保護(hù)信息內(nèi)容的隱私并不能阻止其他類型的隱私侵犯，這與侵犯的理由是否合理無關(guān),。

因此，人們很有可能會(huì)誤讀扎克伯格在貼文中的承諾,，并不僅僅是因?yàn)樗陔[私保護(hù)承諾方面向來都做得非常糟糕。

然而,，我倒是希望以積極的一點(diǎn)來收尾,，因?yàn)樵瞬裨谖闹刑岬搅酥档萌藗兇筚澨刭澋囊稽c(diǎn)：也就是安全數(shù)據(jù)儲(chǔ)存的部分，以及Facebook如何拒絕“在有違反人權(quán)記錄的國(guó)家”部署這一技術(shù)，例如違反隱私保護(hù)或個(gè)人言論自由,。

他寫道：“如果我們打造數(shù)據(jù)中心,，并將敏感數(shù)據(jù)儲(chǔ)存在于這些國(guó)家，而不僅僅是捕獲非敏感數(shù)據(jù),，那么當(dāng)?shù)卣涂梢愿颖憷孬@取個(gè)人信息。堅(jiān)持這一原則可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致一些國(guó)家封鎖我們的服務(wù)，或者我們難以在短時(shí)間內(nèi)進(jìn)入這些國(guó)家,，但我們?cè)敢鉃榇烁冻鲞@些代價(jià)?！?/p>

他并沒有在文中指名道姓,，但很明顯,，其矛頭對(duì)準(zhǔn)的是俄羅斯,，這個(gè)國(guó)家設(shè)立了強(qiáng)有力的數(shù)據(jù)本土化法律,，表面上看是保護(hù)公民的隱私,，實(shí)際上很有可能是為了讓國(guó)家情報(bào)機(jī)構(gòu)能夠?qū)駭?shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行嚴(yán)密監(jiān)控,。

俄羅斯監(jiān)管方一直都在威脅封鎖Facebook,，因?yàn)镕acebook拒不遵守俄羅斯的數(shù)據(jù)本土化法律，這個(gè)問題讓俄羅斯當(dāng)局越發(fā)感到惱火,。

我們可能會(huì)看到,，F(xiàn)acebook在不久的將來將退出俄羅斯,，而不是背叛其用戶,。在這一點(diǎn)上，扎克伯格確實(shí)值得表揚(yáng),，但貼文的其他內(nèi)容就沒那么值得稱道了,。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：馮豐

審校：夏林

Facebook hasn’t had such good headlines for a while. It’s “pivoting to privacy!” Say hello to a “‘privacy-focused’ Facebook!”

No, and no. What Mark Zuckerberg describes in his “privacy-focused vision for social networking” Facebook post recently is in many ways not pro-privacy at all.

That’s not to say Facebook isn’t moving towards a limited kind of privacy. By focusing more on messaging one-on-one or within small groups, it will be placing greater emphasis on conversations that are private from wider networks of people. The use of strong encryption—already the default in WhatsApp and an option in Facebook Messenger—keeps the contents of communications private from governments and indeed from Facebook itself.

But what Zuckerberg’s post is really about—the integration of WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger and Instagram’s infrastructure—couldn’t be less privacy-friendly.

First problem: many people signed up to WhatsApp and Instagram, which Facebook went on to buy, without wanting their information to be assimilated into the Facebook hive-mind.

Indeed, in Europe a condition of Facebook’s WhatsApp acquisition was that Facebook would refrain from doing that—the company ended up with a $122 million fine for lying to antitrust regulators on that point. The German competition authorities have already warned Facebook about its latest integration moves, which will be illegal in the EU without clear, voluntary consent from users.

The integration of Facebook’s various messaging services will obviously allow people to communicate across those platforms, which may introduce greater convenience, but it will also allow Facebook to build more accurate profiles of their users, for ad-targeting purposes.

Zuckerberg may talk about the safety benefits of strong encryption, but those benefits only extend to the contents of people’s messages, not the associated metadata that tells Facebook who is talking to whom, and when. This is extremely valuable profiling information—the fuel of what Shoshana Zuboff calls “surveillance capitalism.”

In the encryption part of his essay, Zuckerberg treads on some very fragile ground. “In the last year, I’ve spoken with dissidents who’ve told me encryption is the reason they are free, or even alive,” he says with a great deal of chutzpah—Facebook has only just been caught out using phone numbers, which people submitted to lock down their accounts’ security, as data to make those people easier to identify on the network.

“Encryption is a powerful tool for privacy, but that includes the privacy of people doing bad things,” he continues. “We are working to improve our ability to identify and stop bad actors across our apps by detecting patterns of activity or through other means, even when we can’t see the content of the messages, and we will continue to invest in this work.” Again, protecting the privacy of message contents does not stop other types of privacy invasion, whether for good or for bad reasons.

So there’s a real danger of misinterpreting what Zuckerberg is promising in his post—and not just because his track record on privacy promises is thoroughly dismal.

However, I’d like to end on a positive note, as there is one point in Zuckerberg’s essay for which he should be unequivocally congratulated: the part about secure data storage, and how Facebook refuses to deploy it in “countries that have a track record of violating human rights like privacy or freedom of expression.”

“If we build data centers and store sensitive data in these countries, rather than just caching non-sensitive data, it could make it easier for those governments to take people’s information,” he writes. “Upholding this principle may mean that our services will get blocked in some countries, or that we won’t be able to enter others anytime soon. That’s a trade-off we’re willing to make.”

He’s not naming names here, but the obvious reference points here is Russia, which have strong data localization laws that are ostensibly about protecting citizens’ privacy, but most likely aimed at keeping citizens’ data close to state intelligence’s grubby mitts.

Russian regulators have long threatened to block Facebook if it won’t adhere to the country’s data localization law—an issue that is increasingly annoying them.

Perhaps we can expect to see Facebook exit Russia in the near future, rather than betray its users, and for that Mark Zuckerberg really does deserve a pat on the back. For the rest of his post, though, not so much.