LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-07-2017, 01:04 AM   #1
hazel
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 5,310
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104
Facebook , child porn and the BBC: you couldn't make it up!


Some time ago, the BBC did an investigation into "secret" Facebook groups, which were exchanging unpleasant pictures of children. They found quite a lot of images that they considered pornographic and they reported them to Facebook using the button provided. But only 20% of them were removed.

So they contacted the management and asked them why they were allowing so many of these pictures to remain. They were told to send in the pictures as evidence. When they did so, Facebook reported them to CEOP (the police's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Agency) for "distributing indecent images of children". Never mind that these images had previously been passed as OK by Facebook moderators, that they were being "distributed" only to Facebook itself, and only for the purpose of forcing the management to take them down.

Apparently what is "indecent" is any attempt to dent the profits that Facebook makes out of porn!

Of course you don't treat Auntie Beeb like that! They made the whole thing public and Facebook withdrew the charge immediately.

Last edited by hazel; 03-08-2017 at 01:44 AM. Reason: Corrected acronym
 
Old 03-07-2017, 01:58 AM   #2
fido_dogstoyevsky
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Victoria, Australia
Distribution: Slackware 14.2
Posts: 419
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 498Reputation: 498Reputation: 498Reputation: 498Reputation: 498
Another reason to not have a facebook account. As if another was necessary.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 07:46 AM   #3
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187
Perhaps there needs to be a wide-spread criminal investigation against Facebook, Inc. in both the UK and the US.

Quite clearly, Facebook knew that the images were there – hell, they could see them – and I find it quite strange ... obviously suspicious ... that they first asked the whistle-blowers to "send us the pictures as evidence," then filed a retaliatory criminal complaint for them "sending lewd pictures in the mails."

There was no need for anyone to "send them evidence." They did this only so that lewd pictures would be sent in the mails. This is entrapment, and it is illegal.

It is a violation of American law [telecommunications law and otherwise] to allow such material to be on your web site, and it is also a criminal act for the moderators to have approved them and/or to have allowed them to remain. Their actions in this case seem to me to clearly indicate that, not only did they know that the materials were there, but they intended to lure whistle-blowers into a legal trap and then use the courts to retaliate against them.

I would say that Facebook's corporate actions here are a felony.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-07-2017 at 07:49 AM.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 08:41 AM   #4
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware14.2 64-Bit Desktop, Devuan 2.0 ASCII Toshiba Satellite Notebook
Posts: 3,160

Rep: Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936
From the BBC:

Quote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39187929

Facebook failed to remove sexualised images of children


Facebook has been criticised for its handling of reports about sexualised images of children on its platform.
https://www.rt.com/uk/379728-facebook-child-sex-images/
 
Old 03-07-2017, 09:46 AM   #5
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187
No, to protect our children, Facebook, Inc. should face criminal charges – and the moderators and other employees who knew or who should have known about the materials should face their own personal charges, and prison time.

Even though the materials were uploaded by a Facebook user, the materials were retained and published by Facebook, Inc. in violation of a great many laws that were written to protect children.

Attempting to entrap or blackmail a whistle-blower is also a felony offense.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-07-2017 at 09:47 AM.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 09:54 AM   #6
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware14.2 64-Bit Desktop, Devuan 2.0 ASCII Toshiba Satellite Notebook
Posts: 3,160

Rep: Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936
Somehow I am not surprised by all this. After all Facebook seems to also be targeting anyone with a conservative view, now this.


Also, this isn't about facebook but still relevant - case is dropped against a pedo because FBI refused to reveal methods on how they caught said person on TOR.

Quote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39180204

Child porn case dropped to prevent FBI disclosure

US prosecutors have dropped a case against a man accused of using a child porn site because the government refused to divulge how it revealed his identity.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 09:58 AM   #7
frankbell
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu MATE, Mageia, and whatever VMs I happen to be playing with
Posts: 17,223
Blog Entries: 27

Rep: Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329
A classic case of "Shoot the Messenger."

Furrfu.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 10:09 AM   #8
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware14.2 64-Bit Desktop, Devuan 2.0 ASCII Toshiba Satellite Notebook
Posts: 3,160

Rep: Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbell View Post
A classic case of "Shoot the Messenger."

Furrfu.
Seems that way doesn't it? Very corrupt and rather totalitarian-like. Silence the whistle blower and do away with morality.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 12:03 PM   #9
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187
In United States law, intimidation of a "whistleblower" is a crime unto itself.

US Laws also specifically forbid child pornography. Pornographic websites are subject to the Communications Decency Act and other laws.

This might be an excellent opportunity to file criminal charges against Facebook, Inc. and, separately, all of its relevant employees and officers, under these Acts and others.

Although, in the past, the web site owners have squirmed away, this is clearly a situation where employees of Facebook, obviously knowing full well that this atrocity was going on "on their watch," not only defended it but attempted to entrap a whistleblower who reported it.

Especially egregious, and therefore especially worthy of criminal action, is that these are little boys and girls!

If Facebook is forced to pay $5 billion (and, they can afford it ...), while a few dozen of its employees and one or two of its executive officers report to Federal prison to begin a fifty-year sentence with no parole after individually paying $50 million apiece in restitution ... well ... I think that people would notice that.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 03-07-2017 at 12:05 PM.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 12:46 PM   #10
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware14.2 64-Bit Desktop, Devuan 2.0 ASCII Toshiba Satellite Notebook
Posts: 3,160

Rep: Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936Reputation: 936
This is relevant - and very disturbing:

Quote:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39194844

Manhunt in Germany after suspect kills boy and brags about it on video

A manhunt is under way in Germany after a man allegedly stabbed a nine-year-old neighbour to death and uploaded a video boasting of his deed to the dark web.

Another user in the dark web - a hidden part of the internet where guns, drugs and child abuse images are traded - alerted police, a spokesperson said.
 
Old 03-07-2017, 09:24 PM   #11
frankbell
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu MATE, Mageia, and whatever VMs I happen to be playing with
Posts: 17,223
Blog Entries: 27

Rep: Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329Reputation: 5329
Quote:
Although, in the past, the web site owners have squirmed away, this is clearly a situation where employees of Facebook, obviously knowing full well that this atrocity was going on "on their watch," not only defended it but attempted to entrap a whistleblower who reported it.
Well, if anything ever happens to Facebook, Facebook staffers have bright futures on Wall Street.
 
Old 03-08-2017, 01:54 AM   #12
hazel
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 5,310

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104
There was no whistleblower. This was entirely an outside investigation by the BBC; it didn't, as far as I know, involve any Facebook employees. Consequently, the laws that protect whistleblowers aren't relevant here.

I'm not sure what the UK position on entrapment is. It's certainly disapproved of, but I don't know if it's a criminal offence. UK law would apply in this case, because the entrapment took place on British soil.

I think what matters is the "Court of Public Opinion". Facebook have defaecated in their own pants and they now have it all over themselves.
 
Old 03-08-2017, 08:07 AM   #13
GazL
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 5,789

Rep: Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705Reputation: 3705
Quote:
The social network's director of policy Simon Milner agreed to be interviewed last week, on condition the BBC provided examples of the material that it had reported, but had not been removed by moderators.
The BBC did so, but was reported to the UK's National Crime Agency as a consequence.
By "send me examples", he most likely meant send me urls of examples and the BBC journalists misunderstood. His secretary then gets a nasty surprise opening an envelope full of horrible images and calls the police.


Never attribute to malice that which can be equally explained by incompetence.


Having said that, I have no love for facebook or the BBC.

Last edited by GazL; 03-08-2017 at 10:09 AM.
 
Old 03-08-2017, 09:25 AM   #14
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187Reputation: 3187
But, once again, Facebook, Inc. has no need to ask anyone to "send me examples." It is their system, and they must know what it contains.

Our laws concerning web sites and so forth are so utterly naive, it's scary. Why are we so in love with this technology, that we stubbornly defend those who would use that technology against us and against our children?

And once again, "the dark web." We have a map of every single computer that's on that vast network. We can do very detailed traffic analysis. (Even with TOR.) If we put our minds to it, and if we are determined to stamp it out and to hold responsible those who facilitate it (e.g. Facebook, Inc.) by defining legal liabilities that will stick ... then, we can do something about it. "We have the technology."
 
Old 03-08-2017, 09:30 AM   #15
hazel
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 5,310

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104Reputation: 3104
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
But, once again, Facebook, Inc. has no need to ask anyone to "send me examples." It is their system, and they must know what it contains.
Hardly! There are millions of posts added every day to Facebook. Much as I dislike them and what they stand for, I think it's unreasonable to expect them to keep track of all that. That's what Report buttons are for. The scandal is that they don't work.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
You couldn't make it up! hazel General 11 09-29-2016 01:33 AM
LXer: No, Department of Justice, 80 Percent of Tor Traffic Is Not Child Porn LXer Syndicated Linux News 10 01-31-2015 12:00 PM
BBC Survey about on-demand content - make sure linux gets access! Jorophose General 10 02-03-2007 06:48 PM
Cannot allocate memory: couldn't spawn child joshfields Linux - General 2 01-14-2006 10:39 PM
How do I make LNX BBC bootable? CyberLord_7 Linux - General 2 05-03-2004 05:17 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration