latest updates from easySERVICE™
Facebook ignited a flood of criticism last week when it began requiring mobile users to load its Messenger app for Android and iOS separate from its basic Facebook app.
Some users complained about having to use the separate app to send messages, photos or videos to their friends. Other users were concerned that the Messenger app stinks of Orwellian 1984-style invasions of privacy.
Concerned users claim the app could give Facebook the use of their phones and tablets to take photos and to make phone calls without their specific approval. “Beware!” wrote user Rasikh J on Saturday in a review of the app in the Google Play store. On Thursday, a user identified as G Kay wrote in the iOS App Store about the app: “What Facebook can do through this app scares the crap out of me…They can access my microphone, camera and contacts.”
The truth of how the Messenger app uses a device’s phone and camera is apparently far less insidious than many have thought, according to Facebook.
Facebook said that the “permissions” language used in the Google Play Store to describe how Messenger functions with a user’s phone or camera was written by Android officials, not Facebook, to describe a large array of apps, not just Messenger.
While the Messenger app is basically the same app as in iOS, there are no blanket permissions laid out for iOS users as there are for permissions at the start-up of the Android-based Messenger app. As a result, the privacy dangers many users are concerned about aren’t as easily evident in the iOS version, although some iPhone users are still concerned about privacy breaches.
Facebook noted in an email to Computerworld that the Android permissions language for a wide range of apps was recently updated. Google verified that a permissions language update occurred in May as part of an attempt to make permissions easier for users to understand. A perusal of the updated changes reveals that most of the new Android language for the Messenger app is considerably broader and more vague than when first described in a Huffington Post blog last December.
Facebook posted a statement to users on Aug. 6 that attempts to clarify how the Messenger app will use five functions of a phone or tablet for taking photos, making calls and more. “Keep in in mind that Android controls the way the permissions are named, and the way they’re named doesn’t necessarily reflect the way the Messenger app and other apps use them,” Facebook said.
Here’s how Facebook says its Messenger app uses various device functions, with the bold portion the actual permission that Android requests followed by how Messenger describes its use of each function:
Facebook’s latest descriptions are vastly different from how Messenger uses the camera and phone than how the Android permissions were described for Messenger in December. At the time, the permissions were reported by the Huffington Post as “allowing the app to call phone numbers without your invention” and allowing the app “to take pictures and videos with the camera…at any time without your confirmation.”
Facebook told press that the Android OS controls how the permissions are worded and its language won’t necessarily reflect the way each app uses them.
Android users at any time can call up an app in the Play Store and scroll down to “permissions” to click on “view details” to learn more. For this information on the Messenger app, the Android permissions listed don’t even mention the phone or camera and now only refer to “find accounts on the device,” “read your own contact card,” “read your contacts” and find your approximate and precise location.
Computerworld on Monday loaded the Messenger app onto a review unit of the new Samsung Galaxy S Sport that was supplied by Sprint and received a number of permissions that seemed at times to revert to the more draconian privacy warnings of December. For the camera, the permission (in a pop-up) said, “Allows the app to take pictures and videos with the camera. This permission allows the app to use the camera at any time without your confirmation.” (see screenshot on previous page) For the phone, it simply said, “Uses one or more of phone, call log. Charges may apply.”
For its part, Google said it does not allow developers, including Facebook or others, to adjust such permissions wording because permissions are designed only to address what an app will have access to. Exactly how an app uses the camera or phone is up to each developer and they are allowed to include links to their privacy policies on their app’s Play Store listing page. It’s there that developers can list how they plan to use the information, according to Google. Google also lays out the process that developers should follow in its Android Developers pages.
The concerns raised over Facebook Messenger privacy caused some analysts to wonder how exactly Messenger and other apps, such as Skype, Line and Snapchat, will use a person’s phone or camera without their knowledge.
“I’m in a group that likes to protect my privacy, so I am very wary of clicking yes on permissions when I don’t understand why they need permission,” said Jack Gold, an analyst at J. Gold Associates. “With the camera, there may be a legitimate reason for the app to use the camera to scan a bar code or to scan a Passport as United Airlines does for international check-ins, but I’m still leery about doing so.”
Gold agreed with Facebook that Android’s general purpose permission wording is too vague about what the permission is for or what will be done. “Having access to the microphone for VoIP and chat sessions is fine, but having it monitor you surreptitiously is not,” Gold added. He urged Google to have a more granular permission policy, but noted that Google and Android are making an attempt to define permissions when a user tries to download an app. With iOS, the permissions are often much more vague and general, he noted.
Ultimately, the Facebook Messenger privacy flap is another warning to app users to beware, but also to the mobile industry and developers to find ways to explain to users the permissions for many hundreds of thousands of apps.
“The app has to build a trusted partner relationship with the user,” Gold said. “If you inherently trust the app maker, in this case Facebook, and are interested in using the app, then you’ll likely click yes. But should you trust the app? If you don’t click yes to permissions, then the app won’t load. That’s the dilemma users face, and it’s all or nothing. Having granular permissions against what an app is actually doing is the next step in OS development.”
Source: Associated Press