Why (almost) everything reported about CA Facebook hacking controversy is wrong

medium.com

20 points·jedwhite··4 comments

I'm assuming the poster ran up against an ~80 character limit to the title, but leaving out "wrong" makes the article feel more click-baity than necessary.

Perhaps removing "hacking" or "controversy" from the title to make room for "wrong" would preserve the author's original intent without editorializing.

EDIT: Removing either of those would also likely leave room to re-include "the" before "CA", as is in the original, in addition to "wrong".

Bad and pointless article.

Users don't care whether it was hacked or Facebook gave it away, they care that their data was exposed in ways they weren't aware of.

If anything, the reality (it's intentional) is worse than the misunderstanding (it was hacked). This is no defense of Facebook, nor a counter to the broader narrative.

Very good article. It explains how it come to the point where the data is exposed. Without understanding it, you can not take measures to change it. If it were "hacking" or breakin, the change should be to have stronger security, while if it's intentional data sharing, the change should be modifying privacy policies and data sharing guidelines.

> Users don't care whether it was hacked or Facebook gave it away

You say nobody makes a difference whether some company was a victim of security breach or gave away your data voluntarily? Maybe you personally don't but a lot of people do. Scenarios are completely different and responsibility is different.

> This is no defense of Facebook, nor a counter to the broader narrative.

It is, however, the truth, which seems to be more important than whether or not it defends Facebook or anybody else.

Another article from Medium in favor of Facebook. How surprising.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com