New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Social Media Sites Can Profile Your Contacts

Why you should think twice before you give an app access to your phone’s address book.  

 

Getty Images/iStockphoto

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When you install an app on your smartphone, you’re often asked whether you’d like to share your list of contacts with that app. That might be a convenient way to connect with friends and family likewise using, say, Instagram or Whatsapp, but it also means you’re giving away theirpersonal information to the app developers.

And that personal info could end up being used to create so-called “shadow profiles” of your contacts—even if they don’t use that app or social media service.

Shadow profiles emerged as a potential problem in 2011 when an Ireland-based advocacy group accused Facebook of gathering information on nonusers, including names, email addresses, phone numbers and physical addresses.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The following year researchers showed that social network companies such as Facebook could use machine learning to pretty accurately predict whether two nonmembers known by the same member also know one another. Not exactly Big Brother, but a recent study in the journal Science Advances raises the stakes.

In that work, David Garcia, chair of systems design at the sci-tech university ETH Zürich, used a social network member’s personal information to infer relationship status and sexual orientation of the members’ contacts who did not have their own user accounts on that social networking site. [David Garcia, Leaking privacy and shadow profiles in online social networks]

He was able to do that using, of all things, data from the now defunct Friendster social networking site. He says he chose those two attributes—relationship status and sexual orientation—because they cancarry important privacy consequences and were both available in the Friendster data set.

Garcia is careful to point out that he didn’t prove that shadow profiles exist, just that they can be created. His work also reminds us how much we wind up revealing online—about ourselves and about the people in our lives.

—Larry Greenemeier

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe