this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
239 points (97.2% liked)
Selfhosted
59923 readers
598 users here now
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam.
-
Posts here are to be centered around self-hosting. Please ensure it is clear in your post how it relates to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or git here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Cambridge Analytical was less of a failure to guard the data, and more of an assistance helping the robbers load it up out the back door.
All the data gathered by Cambridge Analytica was gathered through the public API though, after users had consented to share it (by logging into a quiz app that requested the permissions). That's why the API is very locked down now, and the approval process to get any sort of data access is very strict.
The main issue was that they gathered data from people whose profiles were set to be visible only to friends. If someone logged into the quiz and granted permissions, their friends' data was also accessible via the API.
I remember the event, but I also have the recollection that the user data API availability had been part of sales pitch and marketing of that access despite objections from the EFF and other privacy advocates, which contributed to the scandal once it was inevitably used for unscrupulous purposes. The distinction I'm making is one of intent, but it may be misplaced. Was that not the case?