The justice ministers of 41 US states are really angry with Meta Platforms. They express this in a letter to Meta's general counsel Jennifer Newstead. The reason is an explosion in ads from hijacked Facebook and Instagram accounts as well as the response from the operator Meta, which was perceived as inadequate. This creates a lot of work for authorities. “We are not willing to work as your company's customer service,” complained the 41 justice ministers, who are also the chief prosecutors of their respective states, to Newstead.
Advertisement
A wave of layoffs at Meta in November 2022 is said to be to blame for the misery. “While we cannot be entirely certain of a possible connection, we note that the advertisements increased at the same time as Meta announced a huge wave of layoffs of approximately 11,000 employees in November 2022, reportedly in the 'areas Security, privacy and integrity,” the letter states. At that time, 11,000 positions were more than one in eight positions. Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg's hair must have stood on end as operating profit plummeted to $713 per second in the third quarter of 2022. The ministers point to a CNN report as a source for the concentration of terminations in the areas of security, data protection and integrity, although it does not say anything about this.
The letter contains selected authority figures for the reports filed. In New York State, there were 73 reports of illegal takeover of third-party accounts on Facebook and Instagram throughout 2019. In the first month of 2024 there were already 128. In other countries the increases are also rapid. From 2022 to 2023 alone, the number of reports in Vermont increased more than eight times, in North Carolina more than four times, and Pennsylvania and Illinois also reported case numbers more than three times higher.
No customer service
The allegations are not limited to the fact that Meta is not doing enough to prevent the takeover of third-party accounts. Worse still, there would then be no functioning support for the affected users. The letter cites reports from several victims.
Some victims are directly financially harmed. They have linked their Meta accounts to their bank accounts or credit card in order to purchase online advertising from Meta. The perpetrators take advantage of this and place advertising at someone else's expense, often for thousands of dollars – for Meta's financial benefit. The perpetrators like to advertise offers that violate Meta's contractual terms and conditions. This sometimes leads to a permanent ban on the abused account. Requests from the rightful owner to restore account access will then come to nothing because Facebook has branded them as the culprit.
One takeover, many victims
Other perpetrators use someone else's identity to fraudulently sell products or services under someone else's name on Facebook Marketplace or in direct communication with existing contacts. Or they feign an emergency and ask for financial help. However, according to user reports, it doesn't necessarily help to point out such machinations to Meta. The data company even ignores multiple reports. According to Meta's decision, the perpetrators' behavior did not violate the terms of use, reports one victim. Another quote describes repeated requests for help to Meta over two years, with forms filled out, identity documents submitted and appeals made, without being acknowledged by the company with a response.
However, Meta is not alone in this isolation from customers. Google may have taken stricter measures against account takeovers; However, if they raise a false alarm and block the legitimate user, Google does not allow them to contact you. The account will then remain blocked forever. Some of those affected then complain to the authorities, which causes work there.
“With this letter, we demand that Meta take immediate action and substantially increase its investment in alleviating account takeovers, as well as respond to users whose accounts have been hijacked,” the justices wrote. In addition, they demand discussions as soon as possible and the disclosure of relevant statistics, documents, employee numbers and defense methods.
(ds)