Facebook (Again) Tells Law Enforcement That Setting Up Fake Accounts Violates Its Terms Of Use

from the LAPD-teaching-respect-for-the-law-by-playing-by-its-own-rules-wtaf dept

Law enforcement agencies routinely engage in surveillance of social media accounts. Some of this is accomplished with third-party tools that use keywords and geofences to give cops info that may be relevant to investigations. These tools also give cops a lot of garbage data that law enforcement is free to sift through for officers' own entertainment or to bypass constitutional protections surrounding speech and warrantless searches.

Does it actually help combat crime? The jury (if a court would ever allow one to consider these issues…) is still out on that. But social media surveillance continues under the theory that anything someone published publicly should be accessible by cops since it's accessible by everyone else.

But the constitutional metric changes (or at least should) when cops set up fake accounts to engage in surveillance of suspected criminals. In these cases, cops may be welcomed into more private circles where information can't be accessed unless a person has been given access.

This isn't a new problem. It dates back to 2009, when Facebook was gaining critical mass and Twitter was just starting to generate enough interest to become (very eventually) sustainable. Twitter's account verification process allows users to engage without turning over much personal info. The same can't be said for Facebook, which would prefer to have its user base verified with as much personal info as possible -- something that was supposed to limit abusive behavior but just ended up giving the platform plenty of actionable (and sellable) demographic info. Facebook insisted on real people and real names and altered its policy to inform users that setting up bogus accounts was something that could result in account termination.

Cops didn't care. They had online lurking to do in hopes of finding something prosecutable without ever leaving the office. Facebook warned law enforcement that setting up fake accounts wasn't permissible in 2018 after news surfaced showing cops were bypassing these rules to do a little online fishing for potential criminals.

Facebook is now Meta. It is also still Facebook, albeit under a new umbrella corporation. The rules about "real names" still apply to Facebook account creation. And law enforcement officers are still continuing to ignore this rule. Three years after its last letter addressed to cops about terms of service violation Meta is sending out another one [PDF]. It reiterates what officers already know but are apparently of the belief Facebook/Meta won't actually do much to enforce.

The letter references Los Angeles Police Department activities exposed by the Brennan Center. The LAPD apparently encourages officers to set up fake accounts to locate and surveil criminal suspects. The practice is common enough that the LAPD actually has policies governing the use of social media surveillance via dummy accounts. But the policies ignore Facebook's rules, which take precedence over the LAPD's rules. After all, it's Facebook's platform, not the LAPD's playground.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice and media reports the Los Angeles Police Department (“LAPD”) has been instructing its officers to create fake (or “dummy”) Facebook accounts and impersonate legitimate users. Not only do LAPD instructional documents use Facebook as an explicit example in advising officers to set up fake social media accounts, but documents also indicate that LAPD policies simply allow officers to create fake accounts for “online investigative activity.” To the extent these practices are ongoing they violate our terms of service. While the legitimacy of such policies may be up to the LAPD, officers must abide by Facebook’s policies when creating accounts on our services. The Police Department should cease all activities on Facebook that involve the use of fake accounts, impersonation of others, and collection of data for surveillance purposes.

This alone won't prevent the LAPD from violating Facebook's terms of service to engage in online surveillance. Facebook will have to determine which accounts are fake and terminate them. But this letter gives the LAPD notice that when its bogus accounts are terminated, it will have zero recourse.

The letter also says the LAPD is violating other Facebook rules, albeit indirectly.

It has also come to our attention that the LAPD has used a third-party vendor to collect data on our platforms regarding our users. Under our policies, developers are prohibited from using data obtained on our platforms for surveillance, including the processing of platform data about people, groups, or events for law enforcement or national security purposes (https://developers.facebook.com/terms/#control).

Again, this won't stop the LAPD from utilizing services it's paid for. But it does make it clear that if Facebook ever decides to terminate access to this firehose being abused by third parties, neither the third parties or their LAPD beneficiaries will be able to do anything but bitch ineffectively about the loss of access to a surveillance tool.

Subterfuge is often essential to law enforcement investigations. But that doesn't mean private companies are obliged to provide cover for undercover surveillance. Law enforcement has been told (at least twice) that govern regular people also govern government employees -- people who often seem to believe they're above rules, laws, and even the rule of law.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: fake accounts, impersonation, lapd, law enforcement, police
Companies: facebook, meta


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Nov 2021 @ 11:52am

    Maybe some people should set up fake police benevolence pages on fakebook so we can have the police join the page and then they can be serendipitously surveilled.

    Maybe this has already happened.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Dan Neely (profile), 29 Nov 2021 @ 12:13pm

    If Facebook wanted to discourage cops making fake users...

    They should do what Whatsapp did to NSO Group after they were caught hacking a few years ago; and ban all the personal accounts of employees of any police department caught creating fake accounts to snoop with.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      generateusername (profile), 29 Nov 2021 @ 3:35pm

      Re: If Facebook wanted to discourage cops making fake users...

      ban all the personal accounts of employees

      IIRC there was a bit of backlash to this cause they literally banned every employee and almost everyone thought that was a bit excessive. Sucks to be the guy mopping floors at NSO Group headquarters I guess.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dan Neely (profile), 30 Nov 2021 @ 6:05am

        Re: Re: If Facebook wanted to discourage cops making fake users.

        It being excessive was the point. If it's just Officer Bob the computer guy getting banned probably nothing will happen. Put everyone in the organization at risk and if management doesn't act to protect their own accounts, they'll be facing a revolt from a large chunk of the rank and file individually and (if there is one) a union action as well.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Nov 2021 @ 12:15pm

    It has also come to our attention that the LAPD has used a third-party vendor to collect data on our platforms regarding our users.

    ... and we will not put up with challenges to our bottom line!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 29 Nov 2021 @ 2:29pm

    Oh my sweet summer child...

    Oh Facebook/Meta, US law enforcement barely pay attention to the actual federal and state laws on a good day, do you really think they care even a little being told that they're violating a platform's TOS?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TKnarr (profile), 29 Nov 2021 @ 4:09pm

    The problem is that the LAPD and other LEAs do have recourse: they go gripe at the politicians and threaten to label them as "anti-law-enforcement". The politicians then put pressure on Facebook to let LEAs do anything they want. And Facebook quietly complies.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 Nov 2021 @ 8:33am

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't every instance of this a separate violation of the Computer Fraud
    Abuse Act? Those are serious felonies, and should end in those involved facing decades in prison - if they were ever subject to the same laws as non-LEO citizens. But that's just Rule of Law.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2021 @ 7:16am

    Cop breaks the law...

    should be the headline. The fact that it's considered part and parcel of law enforcement is out right disgusting.

    If those that enforce the law can't follow the rules, then they shouldn't have that power

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2021 @ 7:25am

    Looks like finsta isn't the problem congress thinks it is. Sure, there are issues, but they seem to be coming from the police, cue feigned surprise and blame

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.