happen

Privacy And Social Networks *warning*

10 posts in this topic

Am I right to be concerned?....

Logged in one day to my gmail account, reading an email conversation from a WG whose hotmail address is saved in my contacts list..

I needed to edit the contact details so clicked on her avatar/icon/thingy box over on the right hand page margin.

Up comes an unexpected Google+ page. It has a profile picture of said WG that I've not seen before and some other things to click on so I have a play..

Now under this new picture is a list of people who also have said WG " in circles". These other people, previously unknown to me, have real sounding names and sometimes profile pictures too. You can click on them to further explore who is in their 'circles' and pretty soon I'm right out on civvie street looking at (for example) pictures of proud fathers holding their young children, reading about who they work for and which football team they support. EEK!! Some profiles have a lot of public content e.g. blogs, photos, videos etc., and they come from all around the world. This is obviously fine if all this information has been knowingly placed in the public domain for unknown others like me to view but I have my doubts. All these people have signed up to google+. I'm not signed up but can still see all this stuff. Creepy.

** So be warned that a feature of google+ (if you have signed up to it) is a social network that has the potential to compromise your privacy **

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to look through the curtains at other people, but very iffy if they want to look at me! Have you (Has anyone?) any idea whether having adventured out to follow this trail from WG to (presumably) her civvy life, and then onwards, any of them are aware that you've been peeping at them, or, not (like me) having signed up to Google+, are you safely insulated and concealed?

There is only one WG who has my straight e-mail - otherwise I have another e-mail account only for punting and similar activities, as, I assume, do most of us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i shun arsebook and twatter because they are insecure. Ill probably delete my picassa account now too.

I am increasingly becoming pissed off with google and am using yahoo more and more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reluctantly I joined facebook as it overtook Yahoo groups as a way of our group of friends organising events.

From what I can see, whether you like it or not, facebook matches your email address with anyone else who has your email address in their contact list and suggests you might know them. So up pops the owner of the local parlour who I reccognise via his peculiar nickname. Yes I have emailed him perhaps 2 or 3 years ago but he doesn't know my real name nor me his. My privacy settings are very high and I also disabled people being able to search for me via my email address.

In his list of friends were 3 WG's from the parlour who I've seen over the past year with face pictures, real names, the lot. On 2 of the WG's profiles photo albums were available for viewing too. Dangerous or what ??

Be Warned !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can see, whether you like it or not, facebook matches your email address with anyone else who has your email address in their contact list and suggests you might know them. .

Dangerous or what ??

Bad enough but I don't think that this was the case in my original post. I might have stepped on a pube of theirs on WGs bathroom floor but to my knowledge I am not in *** ****'s address book. What is the case is that WG and *** **** are both signed up to google+ and I am able to browse their 'circles'.

Definitely dangerous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful when you use Facebook on your mobile.

A WG I was considering booking had her work mobile linked to her personal Facebook page, and when I did the 'search for friends' option (or whatever it's called) up her real details popped. It was useful for me as looking at her unphotoshopped photos meant I could see her dodgy tats and so I booked someone else!

Edited by Tibbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to look through the curtains at other people, but very iffy if they want to look at me! Have you (Has anyone?) any idea whether having adventured out to follow this trail from WG to (presumably) her civvy life, and then onwards, any of them are aware that you've been peeping at them, or, not (like me) having signed up to Google+, are you safely insulated and concealed?

Best to assume so. Even if not now, the visibility of your activities today could change in the future (as it frequently has done on facebook, I'm told). So you have to assume everything you do that has any connection with these websites will eventually be made public. That includes browsing websites that have things like facebook "like" buttons on them.

Even if you don't have a facebook account, if a single person ever uploads your photo to some social networking site, and any person tags that photo (could be a different person), then anybody who subsequently snaps your photo with their phone may be able to find out who you are, using face recognition. I don't know whether this is easy now, but if not it will be in the near future - and again, there's nothing to stop somebody doing both the face recognition and the uploading/tagging 5 years in the future for photos taken right now (say, of you walking into a massage parlour). I see no reason why it shouldn't be illegal to offer that face recognition service without the consent of the person in the photo - except that apparently most people don't care. At least, not yet.

It just takes a little imagination to see how much you could automate. What's to stop somebody uploading a bunch of snaps of blokes entering and leaving a parlour? Let's say google's hi-tech camera glasses that I hear they're working on takes off a few years from now. They'll happily let you take a photo of everybody you pass in the street. What's to stop somebody else writing an app that checks every single person you pass in the street, all day, every day, to see if they match any of a set of photos (a bit like tineye, but for face recognition - the technology is already in use on social networking sites)? What's then to stop somebody setting up an amusing little website where people upload photos of the sort taken outside that parlour years ago? Then the person with the glasses just gets a little cheeky sound effect if any guy who's in any of those photos happens to walk by. Maybe they pick the setting where it only goes off if they're a friend of a friend (facebook again), so they can spill the beans to his wife and watch the fireworks? You could take it even futher...

There is only one WG who has my straight e-mail - otherwise I have another e-mail account only for punting and similar activities, as, I assume, do most of us?

I'm curious: do you also use a separate browser profile?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no interest in Social Networking sites, mind numbingly boring as is Twitter in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the same phone number/email address for bookings with wgs as you do for any other every day activities, or if they are doing this, could easily lead to this sort of situation with facebook or other social media sites - the way that they work assumes that you want to find it easy to find people you have contact with, so it's hardly surprising that they can match you up in this way.

If you have a completely separate phone number and email address then it's much less likely, but it's still not impossible for surprises to happen. If you follow any of the 'degrees of separation' theories then you'll see how quickly you can link any 2 people together, so it's inevitable that there will be occasions when punters and wgs may find themselves fairly closely connected by mutual friends or friends of friends, particularly if they have any geographical connection. This has actually happened to me, and I've been very careful to keep everything separated!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad enough but I don't think that this was the case in my original post. I might have stepped on a pube of theirs on WGs bathroom floor but to my knowledge I am not in *** ****'s address book. What is the case is that WG and *** **** are both signed up to google+ and I am able to browse their 'circles'.

Definitely dangerous!

Yes but there's also another feature which I noticed when using the mobile version of facebook - it looks through your phonebook, just at the numbers, and matches them to profiles and suggests them as friends. Even if you've put the name "John Smith" for the agency, it's not fooled. I had the numbers of several agencies in my phone and it turns out some of them have facebook profiles which are totally clear as to what they are. They're now suggested as friends whenever I look. The same could work in reverse - if you have your mobile number in your profile, even though it's totally private and only visible to friends a WG or agency could add you to their phonebook and then log into facebook and look for friends and it'll helpfully suggest me....and my real identity would come up.

Edited by punter992005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now