Blummin facebook

[ZombieCake]

Speaking to various people in highly placed organisations one of the biggest problems around IT security, data protection, etc. is still around complacency, crass arrogance, and dismissal of the problem both corporately and individually from people that that ought really to know better.  Although people are starting to wake up a bit more now.
It does indeed seem that smaller enterprises have much more to lose from any enforcement action than some larger international organisations who may see regulatory fines as a cost of doing business.  Specimen test cases are most likely just the tip of the iceberg and won't really dent profits. Although I think one of the intentions of GDPR was really to get the rogue organisations to put their house in order.  Oh well.

 

[mountainpenguin]

https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy?language=en everyone should watch this

 

[aardgoose]

It will be interesting to watch the GDPR legal challenges being brought against FB etc by Max Schrems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Schrems

Capture of metadata such as addresses, contact and locations can potentially give away much more important information that you might think. Messaging apps leak a lot more information than you might think. Eg connecting patients who share a psychiatrist in common:

https://splinternews.com/facebook-recommended-that-this-psychiatrists-patients-f-1793861472

Also FB have recently admitted to multiple massive exposures of user passwords.

 

[ZombieCake]

I'd be far more worried about our own government given they want to create a database full of everybodies sexual proclivities in a few months.

I think you are right, but a government database, that's perhaps not quite right.  They've given responsibility to a 'prawn-o' company to administer it.  Like that won't be a target for every hacker on the planet.  Perhaps, say metaphorically, speaking a washing machine engineer or similar (and not an MP of course) may want to meet like minded people for some contribution to their rent for information on washing machines had their data hacked and sold to anyone there could be right to do when the papers got hold of it.  Not to mention associates of said person's contacts taken without consent at the same time and innocently were linked to washing machine rent initiatives.
There again there'll be that person who was worried about finances and looked at certain short term loan sites, or talked about it.  That'll be captured by some and passed on, so do the world at large really think the best low finance deals would be shown to them when IP addresses and other meta data things converged on a search?
Data items are linked from a variety of sources and continuously updated. 
A lot organisations are very diligent when it comes to GDPR and that is admirable, but the likes of some completely undermine this.
The reason some companies have zillions of dollars is because they have made it selling your information.  All of it.
Perhaps the real associated issue is that we know who the drug dealers of data are, but who are the snorting consumers of that data?
Sorry if you think it's a rant, and I'm really not having a go at any individual organisation, but there is really a lot of shockingly nasty behaviour out there that would surprise a lot of people.

 

[PeteHall]

Going back to the original question...

If for example, the Ingleton Coop Facebook page started sharing stories on caving Facebook groups, you can see how that would be considered advertising.

I suspect that Facebook considers the UKC page much like the Coop page. Presumably they have created a new algorithm to prevent business pages from posting advertising to groups.

In itself, this seems like a good thing. It's putting users ahead of advertisers, right?

I would speculate that such an algorithm is unable to distinguish between the Coop promoting a special offer on beer and snickers bars, or UKC sharing an interesting or entertaining post about caving.