One Story of Closure: Naked Nikita

This story being posted, with permission, is by Shelly Marshall - a friend of EOPC and the site owner of YOU ARE A TARGET. (please visit her site when you have a chance!)

Her site is full of healing and validating words for those who have suffered all kinds of abuse.We thank her for her continued friendship and allowing us use of this story - Fighter.
~~~~~

"Would you give him the man back his keys," the deputy said into the phone.

My sleepy voice came back, "Officer, I don't have his keys," He had awoken me at 2am and I could hear my husband in the background slamming doors and throwing things about. I was in the RV beside the house, having moved because of his all-pervasive anger and our impending divorce.

"Well, if you just happen to find them, would you throw them in the door? Or I will have to do a full investigation on you." The officer's insinuations pissed me off because I had done nothing but go to bed in the RV once my ex came home displaying his usual hostile demeanor. I remained polite.

Bob found his keys about 20 minutes later but didn't bother to call the deputy back to say he was mistaken about me taking them. He moved out in a rage that very night and, except for a moment here or there, I never saw him again. I needed closure.

On the phone when he called about his belongings I asked, "Aren't you going to apologize for again accusing me of something you did yourself?" Accusations were one of the constant forms of abuse I took from my husband for so long. What he said was, "I found them in a place I would never have put them." No matter what, this man would probably never take responsibility for his own actions.

Ideally, I wanted him to say, "I understand it wasn't right to be so angry at you all the time. I'm sorry I was depressed and took it out on you. I'm sorry I couldn't share things with you and make you my partner. You never deserved the hostile and intimidating treatment I dished out. It wasn't your fault that I mistreated you." Fat chance that is going to happen.

S. Vaknin explains that there are two types of closure (well three but the third is insanity and so we won't go there). Sam describes:

Conceptual Closure

"This most common variant involves a frank dissection of the abusive relationship. The parties meet to analyze what went wrong, to allocate blame and guilt, to derive lessons, and to part ways cathartically cleansed." ~ Sam Vaknin

Ideally Bob would let me know that it wasn't my fault, that I could have done nothing to deserve it, that nothing I did would have made him better. And in return, I could share with him that he only abused me to the extent that I allowed him to. Maybe then I could let go of the self-incrimination.

Failing the perfect scenario, comes

Retributive Closure

"When the abuse has been "gratuitous" (sadistic), repeated, and protracted, conceptual closure is not enough. Retribution is called for, an element of vengeance, of restorative justice and a restored balance. Recuperation hinges on punishing the delinquent and merciless party."~ SamVaknin

Well the good news is, I received BOTH types of closure during the same month. November of 2004. The Conceptual Closure came from my first husband, albeit 25 years later! And the Retributive came via an anonymous email telling me that Bob was posting his naked picture on AdultFriendFinder.com and looking for a "tolerant" soul mate who would go to nudist camps with him. The stories intertwined, as luck would have it.

My First husband made a 25 year due Amends

My first husband "S" contacted me via email and wrote, "I want to make amends, can I fly out and see you?" I was perplexed - I wanted amends from the current abuser, not the first one, but… well maybe this was God's way of taking care of what could be taken care. Of course, I would accept this.

"S" called on the phone (I didn't want to see him) and said, "Shelly I am so sorry for the way I treated you and any pain I caused. I am quite sure you were ready for a long-term commitment but I was too sick. No one deserves to be treated the way I treated you. You are a lovely person, the love of my life. I was just too sick and immature to do the right thing. You never did anything to cause me to act so terribly to you and you could have done nothing to change it."

What a wonderful and inspiring thing to do. He is in a good marriage now and in fact married "his best friend." I am envious that she got my husband! He was the man I was going to grow old with and he got better for someone other than me. However, as I told "S," he only abused me to the extent that I allowed it. And with him, it wasn't long because fortunately, he kept hitting me. After the third big beating, I simply left him. End of abuse. We were married only 18 months.

So "S" did for me what Bob could not and I thought that was all the closure on this abuse thing I was going to get. Yet, during that same month, quite unexpectedly, I received an email from a source I will not name. I don't want Bob to know that someone is watching him. But this was an unexpected gift from God that dovetailed "S's" eloquent amends. And this was where I was able to get the second kind of closure "Retributive" and I have to say it's about as sweet as "S's"!

An email said Bob was naked on the Internet

The "anonymous" email informed me that Bob was posting naked pictures of himself on the Internet at AdultFriendFinder.com under sunbuff10! I was incredulous - the guy with the conservative facade? The one who did not like me wearing tank tops to AA meetings or short shorts to work in the yard? The one who's public image took priority over everything? I had to see this. (typical cyberpath behavior too! acting ethical & moral when they are ANYTHING but - Fighter)

I went in as 'NakedNikita' in honor of my first husband's dog

Well the way it works is you have to join this "dating" service (its really a porn service) to see any pictures - so I signed up for a free membership. "S's" dog is named Nikita so I borrowed the dog's name and signed up as "NakedNikita." I found Bob's site and profile right away but still couldn't see any pictures - apparently you had to be invited to see them. I was shocked that there were 300,000 members signed up in Virginia alone. It seemed people in Virginia were sex starved or something. I left the site.

Debating whether I was going to pay any money to see my ex's naked pictures on the net to PROVE he was a bastard - I went into my NakedNikita mail box and there was Bob's picture wanting to get to know Naked Nikita!!!!! Shock of all shocks. How could this have happened? Out of 300,000 he was the first person in my box?

This was too good. So I wrote back. He invited me to his private gallery. There were nudes of him in the private album, one was of him sitting in his back yard with a big ***** and the caption "Want to sit on my lap?" Oh, isn't he clever, I thought. My ex also had this same picture published on the public album that went with his profile. In his profile he advertised for a "lover and a friend" who "likes nudity, and wants a good time" -- he also stated in the cupid section that he is interested in threesomes and, although straight, he is "bi-curious." He invites ladies to look at his naked body and ****** and if they are interested, to "drop him a line." (another TYPICAL sex-addict cyberpath move - many of them LOVE to expose themselves or their genitals to their targets under the guise of "love" or "sharing" - but if you note - they are interested in the genitals only - they see you as OBJECTS not people!! and they show you their 'goodies' because they ASSUME you are only interested in objects too - Fighter) He had a picture of our dog, Cayce, and a picture of a wolf he had drawn for me on our first Christmas together.

As Nikita, I fudged on my age but pretty much told him the truth about my thoughts and likes and dislikes. He wanted a picture of me so I went into my bathroom and snapped a few shots, cropped the head and sent it to him. I thought surely he would recognize me. Apparently not. (typical again, to these abusers/ predators - women are just PARTS! - Fighter)

I wrote him that I used his picture in my fantasy and how sexy he looked. Men are easy. He responded with vigor. (paraphrased):

Good morning Nikita!

What a pleasant surprise to find your pic in my box this morning! Nice tight body! Hope you can send me your face too. I am very interested in you also.

I find it exciting to think you would use my picture in your fantasy! Use as you wish, I do have a web cam if you are interested in a real time fantasy! I can do whatever you wish on cam. You have a great body! Looking forward to meeting you, Bob

I want to point out that this is the same man who told me how flabby my body was, seldom complemented me on my looks, suggested numerous times that I work out, and generally made me feel bad about the way I looked.

My Ex was as crazy about Nikita as he had been about me during courting .

I answered and our cyber relationship blossomed in a short time. He responded (paraphrased):

Hi Nikita,
You are truly a rare find for me.There are a number of things that excite me, I listed them (never done this before) (YEAH SURE!!! They ALL say NEVER done it before! - Fighter) 1.) we are both the same sign, don't know how much to believe this but our match sounds exciting! 2.) you love to do things nude, you mentioned nudist colony. I would love to take you to a nude campground in North Carolina, its a great place! 3.) Your body looks fit, you care about it as I care about mine. WE ARE A GREAT MATCH. (Ok Readers - is your cyberpath telling you HE/SHE is YOUR perfect match? A massive RED Flag here! Shelly really reeled him in good! - Fighter)

Bob mentioned a few more highlights. He wanted more pics - so I took a picture of my butt and sent it to him. He still didn't recognize his wife and wrote back "Sweet!" I wondered how he could get so excited over pictures and emails! I began to cry. He was courting a virtual lady. I closed my account on the site and told him it was too raw for me. I also wrote that I couldn't send him my face until I knew he wouldn't plaster it all over the net. His denial must run very deep because he told Nikita that HE RESPECTED "her for being discreet!" He wrote,

"I would not want to get involved with a woman who spreads every part of her body out for all to see. It would be difficult to ever trust her! Your position, to be discrete and private is getting a lot of respect from me, I admire you for it."

What the hell was he talking about???? He just had his pecker plastered out there for the whole world to see. Bob wrote several more times to Nikita, calling her 'Sweetheart' now, and describing how spiritual he was, how he wanted a lady he could trust. (this from a flasher who just destroyed his marriage with lies, abuse, and greed). My ex even began writing a song for me--well Nikita. I sobbed. Bob never loved or knew me - any more than he could know anything about his Nikita. (A horrible revelation but one that is definitively true of many online predators!! It's all words - there's no reality -- they move too fast -- and they tell you whatever they think you want to hear! - Fighter)

He sent me the perfect symbol of our marriage

I wanted to keep the rouse going to see when it would dawn on him that I was me but he sent another picture that did me in. He took the picture of my torso, enlarged it, and printed it out, taping it to the back of his patio chair. He then sat in an adjacent chair, naked, looking longingly at the picture of a vacant headless torso. My ex sent me this picture as a gift about how "good" we would be together. I saw this picture and knew it was the perfect symbol of our marriage. Bob didn't care about my thoughts, who I was and what made me tick. The only relationship he ever had with me was with my torso. When my pesky head got in the way he was so threatened that he had to humiliate it, put it down, criticize it. Bob wasn't falling in love with Nikita - he had relationships with objects not people,

and when his "objects" turned out to be real women and got in the way, he punished them.

(Readers - Shelly's revelation here is so VITAL AND LASER ACCURATE - online you can ONLY be an object!! despite what they 'say.' Re-read this insightful paragraph, please! - Fighter)

I had loved Bob and committed for life. I believed his facade when he courted me like he was courting Nikita. But Bob can't love real people, I can see that now. I have the symbol of our marriage framed and displayed prominently in my office. This was a perfect closure gift from my ex-husband to me, even if he didn't know he was giving me such a prized possession. I treasure it.

The confession became my closure

I sent the confession email after a little over a week. I simply told him the man I fell in love with is the one writing to Nikita and that his sex addiction hijacked our marriage -- I explored some of the things I thought went wrong. Bob had to read how his ex wife, Nikita, really loved him once but HATED the disease that tore us apart. I told him what my brother, Michael Marshall Ph.D., told me, "Bob's addiction told him that I was the source of his misery," and that an exhibitionist looking for another "sexually tolerant" woman to make his "problem" seem ok was like an alcoholic marrying another alcoholic and thinking that will take care of the sickness. I pointed out that, in the end, of all the women in his sexual circle, he didn't want one of the porno sluts, he wanted the one who would NOT display herself all over the net and would not talk dirty and wanted to get to know HIM not just his ****. It was gratifying because in his own superficial way, HE WAS SERIOUS about Nikita, she got to tell him what I wanted to ever since I discovered his sex addiction. When we were together, Bob usually tore up anything I wrote him. He didn't want to hear from me. But I know he read Nikita's confession.

He wrote two additional smitten-type emails to me before I could get the confession off to him--and they were even sweeter and more intimate (for him) than the others. He wrote:

"First off, I am curious about everything about you, let's start with the spiritual you. For myself, I am not religious but do have a very strong spiritual side which has brought me through some tough times.”

For some reason he doesn't connect the dots on the spirituality thing or "respecting" someone he meets on a porno site. Well, who am I to judge? Me, Nikita!

Along with the confession, I sent him another racy picture of myself with my head on so that I wasn't the only one with naked pictures. It was a sort of an apology, letting him know that I didn't do this to have power over him, that he had a picture of me too. It was probably stupid on my part - he wouldn't get the sincerity of the gesture.

After the first enraged response, Bob sent a post script and explained that it was not a "God Thing" that he was in my mail box but that I had highlighted him on a list in my account and the system notified him. So he pursued it. I didn't know how the site system worked. So I guess it wasn't so unusual for his picture to be in my box like that, but for me it was a God thing.

(I always get a kick out of these online predators & abusers telling YOU what to think & believe when they are exposed - of course with zero hard facts or proof - as if (again) their WORDS should be your REALITY - Fighter)

And there was another caveat to all this. During our separation he was frantic to get me to sign a document saying I wouldn't show any of his private pictures to anyone - remember I had some doozies. Yet in his email to Nikita - he told her that she could do anything she wanted with his pictures!!! I had to laugh, he legally undid his contract with me. In addition, I don't think he read the agreement for being a member on AdultFriendFinder.com but it says any member can use the pictures posted on the site in any manner they want, commercial or private! That's how I have legal permission to use his naked pictures, if I so choose.

The closure was fantastic. I felt and feel great about it. At first I was worried that it wasn't in Bob's best interests for me to have decieved him, however briefly. But finally it occurred to me, I spent years protecting him and his image, doing what I always thought was best for him. Now it was time to do what was best for me. Being Nikita and getting to tell my ex-husband the things he wouldn't let me during our marriage and divorce was the right thing to do for me!

from YOU ARE A TARGET

Raped in Front of Her Son by a Man She Met Online

By Martin Fricker

He lured pair to flat before attack

A mother was raped in front of her young son by a man she met on the internet, police said yesterday.

The victim, 23, and her three-year-old boy were lured to the suspect's flat before she was knocked out and raped.

She had met the alleged attacker - known as "Derek" - on a number of occasions after they contacted each other online.

And she took her son with her when the pair agreed to meet close to the M2 motorway in Kent on Wednesday, September 30.

The woman then went with the mystery man to a block of flats in Sutton, South London.

As she drank a cup of tea, he punched her in the face, knocking her unconscious before raping her. Police said when the victim regained consciousness she managed to flee the apartment with her son.

Specialist officers worked with the victim to create an e-fit of the stocky predator.

And they hope an unusual "eagle design" on the spare wheel of his Land Rover may help track him down. A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "The suspect is described as white, in his late 40s and of muscular build.

"He called himself "Derek" and drove an old green Land Rover with a canvas roof. The spare wheel that is attached to the rear of the vehicle had a cover with an eagle design."

The incident is the latest in a series of attacks that have occurred after meetings arranged over the internet.

Last month, Ashleigh Hall, 17, was allegedly killed by a stranger she met on Facebook after telling her mum she was staying overnight with a friend.

And police yesterday revealed the trainee nurse - whose body was found on farmland in Sedgefield, Co Durham, 11 days ago - died after being suffocated.

Durham police said the death was "consistent with smothering".

Homeless Peter Chapman, 32, has been remanded in custody after being charged with the manslaughter and kidnap of the trainee nurse.

He is also charged with failing to give a new address under the Sex Offences Act.

original article here

Harassing Texts & Posts Can Land Poster in Jail

by Hayley Peterson

Harassment using text messages or social networking sites could soon be a crime in Maryland if lawmakers approve two bills making their way through the General Assembly.

"In many different schools, Facebook is being used to harass people," said Sen. Bryan Simonaire, R-Anne Arundel, sponsor of one of the bills. "Right now, current law doesn't handle Facebook and Twitter-type postings. We have to advance with our technology."

Lawmakers added e-mail to Maryland's harassment laws in 1998. The law defined e-mail as a message sent electronically from one person -- or one computer's Internet protocol address -- to another, ignoring the prospect of Web site or blog postings, Simonaire said.

His bill would expand the definition of electronic harassment to include making an "Internet transmission or posting with the intent to harass."

The bill would also increase the maximum sentence for electronic harassment from one year to three years and slap on a maximum $5,000 fine -- bringing it in line with Maryland's sentencing for telephone harassment.

Michael Swartz, director of the Maryland Blogger Alliance, said the blogosphere has "matured" and there's no need for such a bill.

"It seems to me three years is pretty excessive for sending a slew of e-mails," he said. "You can ignore e-mail harassment to an extent."

He said enforcing the law would be nearly impossible, because IP addresses can be faked.

Montgomery County police spokesman Capt. Paul Starks said he hasn't dealt with many cases of electronic harassment, but added that enforcing the law might be even easier than telephone harassment because the Internet can provide a "snapshot" -- from date, place and time to what was communicated -- of the alleged crime.

Another bill in the works from Sen. Delores G. Kelley, D-Baltimore, would add texting to the mix of electronic harassment mediums.

Kelley's bill would make harassing a minor through texting, Internet postings or e-mail a misdemeanor with a maximum three-year sentence and a $5,000 fine.

The bill says people may not "make an electronic communication with the intent to terrify, intimidate, or harass a minor, or threaten to inflict injury or physical harm to a minor."

"The Maryland code is outdated with current technology," Simonaire said. "This is just about getting into the 21st century."

original article here

Uploading photos to Facebook & Twitter Can Make You a Target for Crime

by Meghan A. Dwyer

At 10:31 a.m. Paul Hebert, a resident of Greenville, S.C., posted a photo to his Twitter account, Incentintel. The photo, uploaded to Twitpic, was geo-tagged with his exact location – near Roosevelt Road in Chicago. The website icanstalku.com posted the tweet as an example of dangerous, inadvertent oversharing of information on social networking sites that can lead to crimes like stalking and robbery.

Not only do we know that Hebert is not at home – we know his exact location in Chicago. By posting a single photo from his Android phone, he’s made himself vulnerable to real-world attacks.

Geo-tagging is a form of metadata, or data located inside of other data. In some cases, when a photo is uploaded from a GPS-enabled camera or phone, that photo’s metadata includes precise longitudinal and latitudinal information.

In other words, if you are trying to sell your diamond earrings on Craigslist, and you take a photo of them sitting on your dresser with your iPhone, a simple right click of a mouse could show exactly where you live and where your jewelry resides. And if you tell potential buyers to call you after 6 p.m., we can assume you probably aren’t home during the day.

Criminals don’t have to be computer-savvy to get the information, either.

“I could train a grade-schooler to do it,” said Ben Jackson, a security analyst in Massachusetts who co- founded icanstalku.com to raise awareness of geo-tagging.

The website alters people’s tweets to illustrate how they are inadvertently sharing more than a mere photo. For example, instead of a tweet that reads “Check out this amazing car I want to buy,” the re-post will read “I am currently nearby 1100 N. Clark St. in Chicago, Ill.”

“Most people don’t know that they are sharing all of this information when they post a photo,” Jackson said.

After scouring Twitter, Jackson said he was surprised that about three percent of photos posted to the site are geo-tagged. Arbitron reports that 17 million Americans have Twitter accounts. Given the sheer number of photos users upload daily, he said, three percent is considerable.

“I was simultaneously shocked and amazed,” Jackson said.

Gerald Friedland, a multi-media researcher at the International Computer Science Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, worked with a security analyst to measure the amount of location information available on sites like YouTube, Twitter and Craigslist. Not only were they able to find private addresses of celebrities in Beverly Hills, they also could pinpoint the exact location of otherwise anonymous Craigslist postings.

“What we found was really shocking,” Friedland said. “It’s not at all a fiction – it’s real.”

What started out as an innocent effort to retrieve data, he said, turned into cause for concern.

“We had to find out whether this was a problem or just a bad feeling,” he said. “Unfortunately, the research found out this really is a threat.”

As a researcher, Friedland said, his goal was to let the public know this was happening before criminals caught on.

But right after his study was published in May, suspects in New Hampshire used Facebook and other social networking sites to “cybercase” and burglarize more than 50 homes.

Maura Possley, deputy press secretary for the Illinois Attorney General, said the Attorney General’s Office hasn’t heard of any particular cases in Illinois stemming from social networking sites. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t any.

“We are very aware of the issue,” she said. As a result, she said, Illinois law was modified in January to allow victims of cyberstalking to seek restraining orders.

But the concerns over geo-tagging reach beyond criminal victimization. It’s about privacy, Friedland said.

“I would be much more comfortable going into an airport body scanner,” he said, “than posting the location of my home online.”

The problem, Friedland explained, is that smartphones are unforgivingly accurate.

“My car GPS is actually less accurate than my cell phone,” he said.

By simply disabling the GPS function on your phone, you can prevent geo-tagging. Unfortunately, Friedland said, this may mean that some users won’t be able to use GPS applications like Google Maps.

As geo-tagging becomes more widely understood, Friedland hopes that people will take precautions to protect their privacy. He also would like social networking sites to start purposefully removing location information.

However, he said, geo-tagging in and of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Originally, geo-tags were used to make life with technology easier.

For example, he said, you take three vacations a year and download the photos into your computer. Geo-tags will make sure your Florida, California and Spain photos are separated into different folders.

The problem, Friedland said, is that most people don’t even know about geo-tagging.

“People are not thinking when they use FourSquare or Facebook,” he said.

original article here

Facebook & the Rise of Online Stalking

by Daisy Mendelsohn

“What did people do without Facebook?”

I hear this question a lot, as my friends from back home and from school discuss the fact that most of us found our roommates and some college friends on the social networking site. It is the place where you can keep up with those living in all parts of the world and stay updated on everybody’s lives.

Because of its popularity with high school and college students, it has become a common practice nowadays to begin a Facebook group for possible incoming students at different colleges. George Washington University, Boston University, Loyola Marymount University and USC are only a few of the “Class of 2014” college groups that, as seniors in high school, my friends and I joined in order to get to know our potential future classmates.

Never did it cross my mind that some of those people could be fake—posing as students in order to do the unthinkable.

After all the media coverage on recent cyberbullying - especially the devastating story of Rutgers University freshman Tyler Clementi - it never occurred to me that some of these people I began "friending" on the “USC Class of 2014” Facebook group would end up violating my privacy as badly as Clementi’s roommate did with iChat.

Sure enough, I was soon a victim of online harassment. I met "Jared" on the Facebook page for USC and we really hit it off—there was no romanticism involved—we were just two really good friends who were excited to start their new lives at SC. I talked to him, confided in him and grew close to him from March until September - even though I found out he was going to Stanford instead to be closer to his girlfriend.

I always thought a little bit about the idea that he could be fake, since all we did was Facebook chat, Facebook message or text. But I threw away my doubts since he was on the USC network and Stanford network, which is only accessible if you have a valid school email.

I literally went to Jared to talk about anything and everything—he knew almost all there was to know about me. When we were supposed to meet up at the Stanford game, he never replied to my texts, leaving me a gut feeling that this all could be a hoax. Sure enough, it was, and I was left feeling vulnerable, scared, disappointed and paranoid.

As I was going through this traumatic situation, I remembered that a good friend of mine went through the same exact thing just a few months ago. All of her "close" friends she had met on the college groups, turned out fake as well—leaving her feeling the same anxiety as I am newly experiencing. There are people out there that know everything about me and my friend, and yet we have no idea who they are, where they are and what they are doing with all of the personal information we have given them.

I am disgusted and fearful of every stranger I pass, wondering if that is the person that spent so much time lying to me for so many months. I always have tried to see the good in people, but such a good trait has betrayed me and I am left feeling foolish and unintelligent because of my decisions to be friends with a stranger I never met; it haunts me that some unknown person in this world knows so much about me, could possibly have pictures of me and can use them in any way he likes.

If we could take a poll of how many incoming college students have had the same thing happen to them - as it did to me and my friend - I bet the results would be shocking. This is a problem we need to tackle immediately before these violations of privacy potentially turn into bigger problems—even those as tragic as Tyler Clementi's. This is not just a violation of privacy, this is harassment and people’s safety could easily be jeopardized from these fake Facebook profiles.

We need to take action and go to our universities, our high schools and our friends to teach them of this commonality of fake identities and how people are quite possible obtaining school emails without actually being students of the universities. It’s a frightening thing, but we can fight back; We must update our privacy settings to the strongest possible; we should delete any Facebook friend we have never talked to before; and, most importantly, we have to remember that the only way to know if someone is actually real is to meet them the old-fashioned way - face-to-face.

Keep yourself safe, and don’t let these fake Facebook profilers get such personal information so easily. I learned the hard way, and I don’t want anyone to experience the pain that I am currently going through. From all I have learned from this disturbing experience, the most important thing I ask of you to remember is that, no matter what, our personal safety is much more important than being the “popular” one with a large number of friends on Facebook.

*Daisy Mendelsohn is a pseudonym; the author did not want to use their real name for this piece.

original article here

Is Your Private Phone Number on Facebook?

Probably.

So are your friends' numbers.

If you have a friend on Facebook who has used the iPhone app version to access the site, then it's very possible that your private phone numbers - and those of lots of your and their friends - are on the site.

The reason: Facebook's "Contact Sync" feature, which synchronises your friends' Facebook profile pictures with the contacts in your phone.

Except that it doesn't do that on your phone. Oh no. Because that would be wrong, to pull the photos down from Facebook and put them on your phone. That would breach Facebook's terms of service. Update: A more recent version of the app shows that it does download "your friends' profile photos and other info from Facebook" to add to your iPhone address book.

Instead, what What Facebook's app does it that it imports all the names and phone numbers you have on your (smart)phone, uploads them to Facebook's Phonebook app (got a Facebook account? Here's your Phonebook). (Update: Rhodri Marsden says that you'll now get a big warning sign saying that the numbers are imported into Facebook. That's above.)

Pause for a moment and go and look at it. Did you know those numbers? Did you collect them? Despite the reassuring phrase there - "Facebook Phonebook displays contacts you have imported from your phone, as well as your Facebook friends" - it's absolutely not true. I know because there are numbers there which I don't have. OK, perhaps the people who own them added them; but that's not clear either. So how did they get there? Because it only takes one person to upload another person's number, and the implication is that it's going to be shared around everywhere.

Update: that's the implication of "all contacts from your device... will be sent to Facebook and be subject to Facebook's Privacy Policy". Note, not just your friends - but everyone on your device.

The implications are huge, and extremely worrying. All it takes is for someone's Facebook account to be hacked (perhaps via their phone being stolen) and lots of personal details are revealed. Or, as Craig noted in the comments, you get your phonebook record of "Steve Car" (which was for his garage mechanic) somehow linked to someone called "Steve Carlton" - who he doesn't know.

Update: Facebook says, in a statement: "Facebook never shares personally identifiable information with third parties – advertisers are only given anonymised and aggregated data." It also adds: "Facebook is a free service and something that many people find adds value to their day-to-day lives. As with any service, users do need to invest some time in order to use it properly and we encourage people to use their privacy settings to do this and to access the Help Centre for support."

Kurt von Moos, who first wrote about this earlier this year (since when Facebook has revised its privacy statement, but not altered what goes on in this way) says that there are a number of reasons to be concerned. As he puts it:

"1) Facebook doesn't warn users that they are uploading their phone's adress book to Facebook. In fact, because Facebook doesn't sync contact numbers or email addresses TO your phone, most users wrongly assume that Facebook Contact Sync only syncs user pictures. In reality though, they are pumping your address book, without your consent." [Since then the Facebook app has clearly been updated with a warning.]

Facebook says you can remove your mobile contacts, but it's not clear that that will remove your mobile if someone else uploads it.

von Moos continues:

"2) Phone numbers are private and valuable. Most people who have entrusted you with their phone numbers assume you will keep them private and safe. If you were to ask your friends, family or co-workers if they are ok with you uploading their private phone numbers to be cross-referenced with other Facebook users, how many of them do you think would be ok with it?"

He also points to even more egregious problems: (a) can you be sure how Facebook, or its advertisers or partners or whatever it becomes down the line, will use that data? (b) why is it that Facebook takes all your mobile numbers, rather than matching names of contacts with names of friends? (c) sometimes, it gets the matches wrong - and incorrect (or faked) data that people have given to Facebook as their "contact" details (such as hotels or businesses) gets linked as being a "friend", or the lack of an international dialling prefix messes up the match, and means again that someone who you don't know is identified as a "friend" or contact.

von Moos concludes: "There are some contacts and phone numbers who's privacy I simply refuse to risk on the Web. Facebook has taken and continues to take liberties on behalf of their users. Their perception of privacy and their users perception of privacy is often very different. I don't think this is maliciousness on Facebook's part, but it does show me that Facebook is painfully out of touch with the needs and beliefs of their CORE users, who are still wary of the openness that a Web 2.0 lifestyle entails."

It's not clear whether the official Facebook for Android app does the same. We'd be interested to hear from you if you've noticed this with the app. Update: people in the comments seem to be saying that it does.

So - beware: Facebook quite probably has your details. More of them, in fact, than you might have thought.

SEE PHONE NUMBERS ON FACEBOOK!

original article here

Website Built on Broken Families & Questionable Morals

AN attractive couple lie entwined in a cotton sheet - clearly satisfied after what seems to have been a steamy sex session.

Cue subtitles for a dramatic finale: "This couple is married . . . NOT to each other."

The controversial TV ad for an infidelity website caused outrage when it aired in America.

And now it could hit Britain as part of the multi-million pound UK launch of ashleymadison.com.

Branded "a business built on the back of broken hearts, ruined marriages and damaged families" but hailed by others as "an honest format for an age-old human weakness", the online phenomenon already boasts seven million members in the US, Canada and Australia.

Its owner Noel Biderman, a married father of two, hopes to add one million UK cheaters to his portfolio by Christmas.

Canadian-born Biderman, 39, says: "Ashley Madison is like a traditional dating site but for people already in relationships.

"It was becoming increasingly apparent people who wanted to cheat on their partners were using more traditional sites like Facebook and match.com but concealing the fact they were married when they began dating.

"My research showed around 30 per cent of these people were effectively taking off their wedding rings when they went online.

"So I didn't need to generate infidelity but I saw that I could capitalise on it by taking this pool of people away from the mainstream dating sites and letting them know about another community where both parties could be more honest about what they're doing."

Ashley Madison - which carries the slogan "Life is Short. Have an Affair" - has become a multi-million pound phenomenon, receiving news coverage on leading US shows and channels including CNN and Fox News.

Biderman clearly revels in the "King Of Infidelity" title given to him by the US media and delights in explaining the intricacies of his website.

Starting from £49 for 100 credits, members can email one another (five credits); engage in real-time chat, enter virtual bars and bedrooms (both 30 credits for 30 minutes) and even post virtual gifts to one another.

Launched on February 13, 2002 (a day Biderman has dubbed "Mistress Day"), the following years have been spent honing the product.

Dressed in chinos and brogues, Biderman attempts to present himself as a relaxed charmer but he sips on a can of Red Bull and talks at 100mph as he tries to excuse the questionable morals behind his business.

"I've spent years perfecting the product," he says.

"Lipstick on the collar doesn't catch out people these days. Digital lipstick - emails and text messages that get into the wrong hands - catches them out.

"I've had to convince people that communicating on Ashley Madison is safe, with billing under a pseudonym."

Biderman christened the business Ashley Madison because it combines the two most popular girls' names in the US and he wanted the brand to appeal to women as well as men.

In the UK around 40 per cent of people married or in long-term relationships cheat at some stage.

More than half of women and around 60 per cent of men have been unfaithful in the past.

Love or hate Biderman, he has so far managed to tap thriving markets for infidelity in other countries.

And the no-holds-barred messages on his website have given him an insight into cheating in the 21st Century.

Biderman says this comprises: "Around two men for every woman on the site and a three to four-year itch scenario as opposed to the more mythical seven-year phenomenon."

He adds: "There is also a dramatic shift in family dynamics after the birth of the first child. Intimacy levels between couples change because of the way people feel about their bodies.

"For years, infidelity was viewed as a male phenomenon but Ashley Madison revealed more and more women have been having affairs as opportunity has allowed them to enter the workplace.

"Not every woman a man cheats with is a mistress, is she? And the more emasculated men feel, the more it causes them to lash out and want to cheat on their wives."

Biderman is currently staying in a luxury Mayfair hotel as he prepares to launch his "service" in the UK.

A round of media interviews has been lined up and a £10million advertising budget is poised to be spent if he can get his controversial message past the Advertising Standards Authority.

He claims he has seen enough messages on his website from people in the UK to know there is a "captive market waiting to join".

And he claims: "By Christmas, I estimate that one million Brits will be using the site."

The product of a stable middle-class home, Biderman says there was no role model in his own family for infidelity.

The son of a dentist and a housewife, he thrived at school and was a sports attorney. His older brother is a banker.

Married for eight years, Biderman swears he has been faithful to his wife - a stay-at-home "mom" who looks after his son, five, and daughter, two.

"Have I been tempted to stray? Yes," he says confidently.

"But I talk about infidelity ten times a week. If there is anyone who should know about what it takes to be monogamous, it's me.

"Is our relationship perfect? No. But I try hard to keep it on the right tracks.

"I might one day find myself in a similar position to my members and, if so, I would rather stray then leave the family unit."

So has Biderman considered the possibility his wife might be cheating on him right at this moment?

Appearing a little flustered for the first time, he pauses before responding more slowly: "If my wife was cheating on me right now, I would be shocked."

By all accounts, Mrs Biderman would rather he got a more respectable job, but the legitimising of extra-martial affairs has reaped rich rewards.

Biderman admits to living in a "big house" and driving a Maserati sports car.

He clearly revels in the debate over his business but, amazingly, also tries to convince the world there are heart-warming stories surrounding infidelity.

Like the Ashley Madison Diaries, a book written by a woman trapped in a loveless marriage who allegedly found her Prince Charming on the website.

Or the elderly gentleman nursing a wife with Alzheimer's.

Biderman claims: "With the permission of his children, he joined and spent once a week with a married woman. He wanted to tell me his story because he could see I was getting a hard time in the media."

Actually, Biderman appears to delight in his role as a moral villain because he knows controversy sells.

And as he points out: "Extra-marital affairs existed long before Ashley Madison and will continue to long afterwards."

original article here

Ex-Wife Murdered Over Facebook Posts

A chef has been jailed for life for murdering his ex-wife after she taunted him on Facebook about paying child support.

Adam Mann used a hammer to batter Lisa Beverley, 30, before slashing her neck with a knife, the Old Bailey was told.

Jurors heard Miss Beverley's five-year-old son found her body at their home in Plumstead in south-east London, on the day after the murder in September 2009.

Mann, 29, of Welling, Kent, will have to serve a minimum of 24 years.

'Unimaginable horror'
During the trial the court was told Miss Beverley had no chance of surviving after being hit on the face, head, neck and body.

Jeremy Donne QC, prosecuting, said Miss Beverley's five-year-old son was confronted with a scene of "unimaginable horror" when he found her the next day.

The court heard the couple divorced in 2007 and were involved in a bitter dispute.

Miss Beverley was trying to get Mann to contribute towards raising their son, through the Child Support Agency (CSA). She told the CSA he had lied about being unemployed and he had subsequently been sent a letter demanding payments of about £400.

The day before her death, Miss Beverley's Facebook profile was updated to say: "Now whose laughing? U've got done big time by the CS, so now leave us alone for good, your son hates u and so do I."

Judge Paul Worsley told Mann: "This was a truly dreadful killing."

The judge said Mann had earlier that day been arguing with the CSA.

"You desperately tried to avoid responsibility for your son. I have no doubt you wanted to remove any further claim by removing Lisa Beverley," said the judge. "You have shown no flicker of remorse. I reject the suggestion that there was any degree of provocation."

The court heard the couple divorced in 2007 and were involved in a bitter dispute.

Det Insp Brian Mather, who investigated the murder, said: "This was a dreadful and tragic case and one cannot imagine how Lisa's young son must have felt finding his mother dead under such horrendous circumstances.

"The actions of Mann are indescribable, that he could murder the mother of his son and leave him to discover her body."

High Tech Adds to Abuse of Women

Mobile phones and computers are increasingly being used as tools to abuse, control and stalk women, a report from Women’s Aid reveals.

Many of the 14,613 women who called the Women’s Aid helpline last year said telephone, surveillance and computer technologies were being used to harass and intimidate them.

Women reported:

* How their home and mobile calls were being monitored, as well as their texts by their partners and ex-partners.

* How their phone conversations were being recorded.

* How they discovered that cameras had been secretly installed in their homes.

* Their online use had been tracked and scrutinized, with partners demanding access to their private email and social networking accounts.

* Their partners or ex-partners had put lies about them up on internet sites.

"The use of technology in domestic violence situations is now a key part of the wider pattern of emotional abuse," said Women’s Aid director Margaret Martin.

Women have told Women’s Aid that they feel like they were being watched constantly, that their privacy had been completely invaded and controlled.

"We also heard from women who had been photographed and filmed without their consent, sometimes having sex and having the images uploaded to the internet," she said.

Ms Martin said the use of technology often prevented women from seeking help as they feared that their partner would discover that they had phoned a helpline, had looked at a domestic violence website or spoken of the abuse to their friends, family or colleagues in an email or text.

She said the abuse did not stop for many women who left a relationship, with one in five women revealing that they had been abused by their former boyfriends, husbands and partners.

"For many, technology played a part in the stalking and harassment they experienced," she said.

Women told how they had been bombarded with texts and calls, often telling them in explicit detail how they would be attacked or even killed.

Younger women reported that their current or former boyfriends were stalking them on social networking sites.

Technology is also a lifeline for women experiencing abuse, with almost 90% of calls to the Women’s Aid helpline made from a mobile phone, while its website received over 39,000 visits.

Women’s Aid has also expressed concern about women who are being abused during pregnancy and shortly after the birth of a child.

"We hear from women who are forbidden to breast-feed their child, who are raped in the weeks following childbirth and women who are beaten while holding their baby."

* Women’s Aid national freephone number in Ireland is 1800 341 900.

original article here