0
0
Unveiling the Facebook Ghostbusters Project
The recent unsealing of court documents has shed light on a secretive Facebook initiative known as “Ghostbusters,” conceived to clandestinely access encrypted Snapchat data to obtain valuable insights during Snapchat’s rapid growth phase in 2016. These revelations have emerged in the midst of a class-action lawsuit where consumers and advertisers have accused Meta of engaging in anticompetitive practices that hinder competitors in the social media advertising arena.
Exploring Mark Zuckerberg’s Email
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, now rebranded as Meta, expressed his concern over the encrypted nature of Snapchat’s traffic in a 2016 email exchange with Javier Olivan, then the head of growth at Facebook. Zuckerberg highlighted the urgency of acquiring reliable analytics on Snapchat due to its exponential growth trajectory. To address this issue, Zuckerberg suggested exploring unconventional methods such as conducting panels or developing custom software to fill the analytical gap.
Olivan, now Meta’s chief operating officer, tasked the Onavo team with investigating potential solutions to Zuckerberg’s challenge. The Onavo team proposed a novel project internally dubbed “Ghostbusters,” a clear allusion to Snapchat’s iconic ghost logo. As the project expanded to encompass other major rivals like YouTube and Amazon, it transitioned to the moniker “In-App Action Panel” (IAAP).
Unveiling the IAAP Program
The primary objective of the IAAP initiative was to gather intricate user engagement data from competing apps, aiding Meta in developing tailored products to maintain a competitive edge. Notably, two months post-Zuckerberg’s email, Meta introduced Stories—a feature reminiscent of Snapchat—on Instagram, swiftly evolving into a pivotal revenue stream for the company.
In an internal email exchange, the Onavo team outlined the technical mechanisms devised to bypass Snapchat’s encryption safeguards and gather pertinent analytics. By creating “kits” installable on iOS and Android platforms, the team could intercept traffic from specific sub-domains, decrypting encrypted data to measure in-app activity effectively.
The Onavo team’s utilization of a “man-in-the-middle” attack, conventionally associated with cyber-attacks, allowed them to intercept data flow between parties clandestinely. Users were enlisted through third-party channels, which distributed the kits under their branding to conceal Onavo’s involvement. Subsequently, teens were reportedly compensated for installing these kits, prompting Facebook to terminate the project post-publication of these findings by TechCrunch in 2019.
Challenges and Controversies Surrounding the IAAP Program
Although the IAAP program was devised to bolster Meta’s competitive standings, dissenting voices within Facebook’s ranks raised valid concerns. Pedro Canahuati, the then-head of security engineering, and Mike Schroepfer, the then-chief technology officer, expressed reservations regarding the program’s ethical and legal ramifications.
Canahuati cautioned against incentivizing users without ensuring their comprehension of the activities they were authorizing, highlighting the complexities of user consent. Schroepfer echoed concerns about potential backlash if rival companies were to adopt a similar approach, underscoring the double standards at play in data interception practices.
Despite Meta’s official stance downplaying the significance of these revelations, the narratives depicted in the unsealed court documents have sparked debates regarding Meta’s alleged breaches of wiretapping laws and anticompetitive maneuvers in the advertising sector.
Image/Photo credit: source url
