Facebook's hands are probably tied on some of their reporting here, but there's still some interesting stuff about the US in this report.
1. The US is by far the one requesting the most data. I'd have to run the numbers to be sure, but it looks like even controlling for population and number of FB users, the US is definitely outpacing other countries' data requests.
2. The US is the only country where FB is reporting in ranges instead of precise numbers. There could be several reasons for this, but the reason almost certainly is not that they don't know the precise numbers. NSLs seem like a safe bet here.
3. The US also has one of the highest "success" rates of government requests. 79% of government requests yield some data. This again could be interpreted several ways, but the two most enticing ones are that the US isn't sending a lot of fishing requests because when they request data from FB, they're already pretty certain about what they're looking to find. The more disturbing concern would be if the US only queries FB for things where the NSA's database is insufficient, which would mean the number of requests they submit to Facebook is not at all indicative of how many queries on user data they actually do.
Thanks for the CSV! Here are the top 10 countries by requests per capita[1]:
Country Requests Population Requests Per Capita
Malta 89 415,654 0.000214120398216
United States (Min) 11000 313,900,000 0.000035043007327
United Kingdom 1975 62,740,000 0.000031479120179
Italy 1705 60,720,000 0.000028079710145
Australia 546 22,320,000 0.000024462365591
New Zealand 106 4,405,000 0.000024063564132
France 1547 65,430,000 0.000023643588568
Germany 1886 81,800,000 0.000023056234719
Singapore 107 5,184,000 0.000020640432099
Portugal 177 10,560,000 0.000016761363636
Re: #2. Basically correct. Reporting a range that includes all requests, including those that can't be disclosed individually, is the best outcome we've been able to negotiate so far. Here's the answer in the FAQ:
Why did you report the numbers for the United States in ranges?
We have reported the numbers for all criminal and national security requests to the maximum extent permitted by law. We continue to push the United States government to allow more transparency regarding these requests, including specific numbers and types of national security-related requests. We will publish updated information for the United States as soon as we obtain legal authorization to do so.
I am not so sure the US is outpacing the rest by far. Assuming 179 million American FB MAU [1] and the next highest (India, a country I am a citizen of) having ~3200 requests for roughly 78 million MAU [2]. you get (78/179 * 11500) ~ 5000.
So India is not too far off and I would suggest giving it time :).
Btw, I used 11500 for America as the mean between 11k and 12k since only the range is given.
I guess all governments are spying on their citizens :).
RE #3: They could also already have the data and simply be querying Facebook to establish a "backwards chain of evidence".
Hilariously, I'm reading Cryptonomicon right now and that's exactly what Sergent Shafto and crew do by pretending they're finding German submarine secrets.
Re 3, couldn't it simply be that the US government has the most leverage over Facebook, since Facebook is headquartered in the US, and the majority of its staff and all its senior management live there?
One other consideration is the number of active accounts in various countries. I imagine the penetration in the United States is one of the highest, and the US population is fairly large as well. It would be interesting to get some sort of a relative factor here to get a sense of how aggressive these governments are seeking information.
Thanks for the summary. Per capita data would help put this in perspective, probably. It's also worth noting that the U.S. likely has a much higher usage rate of Facebook than, for example, Asian countries.
In case anyone is curious why there's a comment about the headline, the original headline was ""Facebook's "Transparency Report" cannot be viewed without a Facebook account"" and the new headline is "Facebook's Transparency Report".
I'm a software engineer at Facebook. Requiring login for this page was a simple oversight and should be fixed sometime this evening California time. Sorry for the confusion.
What reason do you have to believe it's inaccurate? What would Facebook gain by posting juked numbers of government requests? Seems pretty honest to me. We'll see if they stay true to their promise to scale deeper and show what kinds of requests they receive.
My initial reaction to this headline was, "Orwellian doublespeak at its best," which is of course the hoped-for response.
On second thought, I don't see why this matters. Facebook transparency matters only to Facebook account holders. And it's free to create an account if you don't have one.
Getting mad over this would be like getting mad when the government releases electronic data sets, which of course means you have to have a computer (and computer savviness) to access them.
"Facebook transparency matters only to Facebook account holders."
Facebook transparency likely also matters to anybody with a "shadow profile". Even if you don't have an account, any friend who has synced their phone's phonebook containing your information to Facebook's servers has established a profile of you which Facebook then has a responsibility to maintain in a responsible manner.
It also matters to anyone who formerly had an account. We're reasonably sure Facebook doesn't delete peoples' content when they request their account be deleted, so such people both have data in Facebook's system and lack an account with which to view the transparency report.
It is entirely possible that you might not want your account details associated with the fact that you are interested in knowing about Facebook's transparency.
Agreed. I would be worried if this were a page on Facebook's policy about government requests. That would mean you would have to sign up and consent to a policy before being able to read.
This, on the other hand, is a report about ongoing operations. Kind of sucks it's not entirely public, but I don't see that Facebook has any ethical obligation to make it so.
I suspect that the government is more interested in the activities of left-leaning groups like Occupy. This is another data point supporting that hypothesis, albeit not a strong one: there are far fewer Facebook users in Pakistan, for one.
Seems like everyone is discussing "wow, there is a report; it's from Facebook, so it can't be true" instead of "wow the US govt has made ~5x requests of the next-largest requestor."
Edit: see Cowen's comment on contents of the report.
Note that this includes all requests from local, state, and any federal agency, for any data. It also only tells you the country of origin for the request, not the country of the user for which data was requested.
[+] [-] Cowen|12 years ago|reply
1. The US is by far the one requesting the most data. I'd have to run the numbers to be sure, but it looks like even controlling for population and number of FB users, the US is definitely outpacing other countries' data requests.
2. The US is the only country where FB is reporting in ranges instead of precise numbers. There could be several reasons for this, but the reason almost certainly is not that they don't know the precise numbers. NSLs seem like a safe bet here.
3. The US also has one of the highest "success" rates of government requests. 79% of government requests yield some data. This again could be interpreted several ways, but the two most enticing ones are that the US isn't sending a lot of fishing requests because when they request data from FB, they're already pretty certain about what they're looking to find. The more disturbing concern would be if the US only queries FB for things where the NSA's database is insufficient, which would mean the number of requests they submit to Facebook is not at all indicative of how many queries on user data they actually do.
EDIT: Here's a quick Gist I made of this report as a CSV. https://gist.github.com/Cowen/adb2d335862a95870773
[+] [-] hglaser|12 years ago|reply
[1] I used the minimum of the range for the US. Its ranking doesn't change if you use the max.
Population data is from Google searches, which lists the World Bank as a source.
[+] [-] sgrenfro|12 years ago|reply
Why did you report the numbers for the United States in ranges?
We have reported the numbers for all criminal and national security requests to the maximum extent permitted by law. We continue to push the United States government to allow more transparency regarding these requests, including specific numbers and types of national security-related requests. We will publish updated information for the United States as soon as we obtain legal authorization to do so.
[+] [-] kshatrea|12 years ago|reply
I guess all governments are spying on their citizens :).
[1] http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/13/facebook-mobile-user-count/
[2] http://www.livemint.com/Consumer/NwNFvLukHEbgbVQH9Dd7UK/Indi...
EDIT: corrected American FB user type to MAU from DAU earlier.
[+] [-] echohack|12 years ago|reply
Hilariously, I'm reading Cryptonomicon right now and that's exactly what Sergent Shafto and crew do by pretending they're finding German submarine secrets.
[+] [-] hglaser|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dancric|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rotskoff|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ancarda|12 years ago|reply
https://help.github.com/articles/rendering-csv-and-tsv-data
[+] [-] lallysingh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mherdeg|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sgrenfro|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sgrenfro|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rhizome|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] casca|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryguytilidie|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] waylonrobert|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yen223|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grecy|12 years ago|reply
Hong Kong: 1 user, 100% hit rate. Iceland: 1 user, 100% hit rate.
I wonder who could have been logging into Facebook from those countries?
Russia: 1 user, 0% hit rate.
I wonder if this is for the same user I'm alluding to above, and if Russia has a firmer stance.
Of course, it's all wild speculation.
[+] [-] hglaser|12 years ago|reply
Can anyone confirm that these include National Security Letters?
CSV export would be nice. I immediately wanted to compute requests per capita by country.
[+] [-] eterm|12 years ago|reply
This is the page for user data requests:
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/
[+] [-] sjbach|12 years ago|reply
These aren't aggregated into the counts shown in the table you linked. http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/co...
[+] [-] anxiousest|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] barretts|12 years ago|reply
On second thought, I don't see why this matters. Facebook transparency matters only to Facebook account holders. And it's free to create an account if you don't have one.
Getting mad over this would be like getting mad when the government releases electronic data sets, which of course means you have to have a computer (and computer savviness) to access them.
[+] [-] uptown|12 years ago|reply
Facebook transparency likely also matters to anybody with a "shadow profile". Even if you don't have an account, any friend who has synced their phone's phonebook containing your information to Facebook's servers has established a profile of you which Facebook then has a responsibility to maintain in a responsible manner.
[+] [-] alcari|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] oakwhiz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rohansingh|12 years ago|reply
This, on the other hand, is a report about ongoing operations. Kind of sucks it's not entirely public, but I don't see that Facebook has any ethical obligation to make it so.
[+] [-] o0-0o|12 years ago|reply
Gentlemen of Facebook and NSA - you are going about this backwards, and we're onto you.
[+] [-] GHFigs|12 years ago|reply
The report does not tell you the country of the user accounts impacted, only the origin of the request.
[+] [-] revscat|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] prehkugler|12 years ago|reply
Edit: see Cowen's comment on contents of the report.
[+] [-] GHFigs|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] djvv|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] omarali|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] markdown|12 years ago|reply
Lack of technical competency?
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] mr_spothawk|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] antonwinter|12 years ago|reply
thats if democracy isn't a myth
[+] [-] niuzeta|12 years ago|reply