Search This Blog

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Labels

Footer About

Footer About

Labels

Showing posts with label Instagram. Show all posts

Instagram Refutes Breach Allegations After Claims of 17 Million User Records Circulating Online

 



Instagram has firmly denied claims of a new data breach following reports that personal details linked to more than 17 million accounts are being shared across online forums. The company stated that its internal systems were not compromised and that user accounts remain secure.

The clarification comes after concerns emerged around a technical flaw that allowed unknown actors to repeatedly trigger password reset emails for Instagram users. Meta, Instagram’s parent company, confirmed that this issue has been fixed. According to the company, the flaw did not provide access to accounts or expose passwords. Users who received unexpected reset emails were advised to ignore them, as no action is required.

Public attention intensified after cybersecurity alerts suggested that a large dataset allegedly connected to Instagram accounts had been released online. The data, which was reportedly shared without charge on several hacking forums, was claimed to have been collected through an unverified Instagram API vulnerability dating back to 2024.

The dataset is said to include information from over 17 million profiles. The exposed details reportedly vary by record and include usernames, internal account IDs, names, email addresses, phone numbers, and, in some cases, physical addresses. Analysis of the data shows that not all records contain complete personal details, with some entries listing only basic identifiers such as a username and account ID.

Researchers discussing the incident on social media platforms have suggested that the data may not be recent. Some claim it could originate from an older scraping incident, possibly dating back to 2022. However, no technical evidence has been publicly provided to support these claims. Meta has also stated that it has no record of Instagram API breaches occurring in either 2022 or 2024.

Instagram has previously dealt with scraping-related incidents. In one earlier case, a vulnerability allowed attackers to collect and sell personal information associated with millions of accounts. Due to this history, cybersecurity experts believe the newly surfaced dataset could be a collection of older information gathered from multiple sources over several years, rather than the result of a newly discovered vulnerability.

Attempts to verify the origin of the data have so far been unsuccessful. The individual responsible for releasing the dataset did not respond to requests seeking clarification on when or how the information was obtained.

At present, there is no confirmation that this situation represents a new breach of Instagram’s systems. No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the data was extracted through a recently exploited flaw, and Meta maintains that there has been no unauthorized access to its infrastructure.

While passwords are not included in the leaked information, users are still urged to remain cautious. Such datasets are often used in phishing emails, scam messages, and social engineering attacks designed to trick individuals into revealing additional information.

Users who receive password reset emails or login codes they did not request should delete them and take no further action. Enabling two-factor authentication is fiercely recommended, as it provides an added layer of security against unauthorized access attempts.


Meta Begins Removing Under-16 Users Ahead of Australia’s New Social Media Ban

 



Meta has started taking down accounts belonging to Australians under 16 on Instagram, Facebook and Threads, beginning a week before Australia’s new age-restriction law comes into force. The company recently alerted users it believes are between 13 and 15 that their profiles would soon be shut down, and the rollout has now begun.

Current estimates suggest that a large number of accounts will be affected, including roughly hundreds of thousands across Meta’s platforms. Since Threads operates through Instagram credentials, any underage Instagram account will also lose access to Threads.

Australia’s new policy, which becomes fully active on 10 December, prevents anyone under 16 from holding an account on major social media sites. This law is the first of its kind globally. Platforms that fail to take meaningful action can face penalties reaching up to 49.5 million Australian dollars. The responsibility to monitor and enforce this age limit rests with the companies, not parents or children.

A Meta spokesperson explained that following the new rules will require ongoing adjustments, as compliance involves several layers of technology and review. The company has argued that the government should shift age verification to app stores, where users could verify their age once when downloading an app. Meta claims this would reduce the need for children to repeatedly confirm their age across multiple platforms and may better protect privacy.

Before their accounts are removed, underage users can download and store their photos, videos and messages. Those who believe Meta has made an incorrect assessment can request a review and prove their age by submitting government identification or a short video-based verification.

The new law affects a wide list of services, including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Threads, YouTube, X, Reddit, Twitch and Kick. However, platforms designed for younger audiences or tools used primarily for education, such as YouTube Kids, Google Classroom and messaging apps like WhatsApp, are not included. Authorities have also been examining whether children are shifting to lesser-known apps, and companies behind emerging platforms like Lemon8 and Yope have already begun evaluating whether they fall under the new rules.

Government officials have stated that the goal is to reduce children’s exposure to harmful online material, which includes violent content, misogynistic messages, eating disorder promotion, suicide-related material and grooming attempts. A national study reported that the vast majority of children aged 10 to 15 use social media, with many encountering unsafe or damaging content.

Critics, however, warn that age verification tools may misidentify users, create privacy risks or fail to stop determined teenagers from using alternative accounts. Others argue that removing teens from regulated platforms might push them toward unmonitored apps, reducing online safety rather than improving it.

Australian authorities expect challenges in the early weeks of implementation but maintain that the long-term goal is to reduce risks for the youngest generation of online users.



EU Accuses Meta of Breaching Digital Rules, Raises Questions on Global Tech Compliance

 




The European Commission has accused Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, of violating the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) by making it unnecessarily difficult for users to report illegal online content and challenge moderation decisions.

In its preliminary findings, the Commission said both platforms lack a user-friendly “Notice and Action” system — the mechanism that allows people to flag unlawful material such as child sexual abuse content or terrorist propaganda. Regulators noted that users face multiple steps and confusing options before they can file a report. The Commission also claimed that Meta’s interface relies on “dark patterns”, which are design features that subtly discourage users from completing certain actions, such as submitting reports.

According to the Commission, Meta’s appeal process also falls short of DSA requirements. The current system allegedly prevents users from adding explanations or submitting supporting evidence when disputing a moderation decision. This, the regulator said, limits users’ ability to express why they believe a decision was unfair and weakens the overall transparency of Meta’s content moderation practices.

The European Commission’s findings are not final, and Meta has the opportunity to respond before any enforcement action is taken. If the Commission confirms these violations, it could issue a non-compliance decision, which may result in penalties of up to 6 percent of Meta’s global annual revenue. The Commission may also impose recurring fines until the company aligns its operations with EU law.

Meta, in a public statement, said it “disagrees with any suggestion” that it breached the DSA. The company stated that it has already made several updates to comply with the law, including revisions to content reporting options, appeals procedures, and data access tools.

The European Commission also raised similar concerns about TikTok, saying that both companies have limited researchers’ access to public data on their platforms. The DSA requires large online platforms to provide sufficient data access so independent researchers can analyze potential harms — for example, whether minors are exposed to illegal or harmful content. The Commission’s review concluded that the data-access tools of Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok are burdensome and leave researchers with incomplete or unreliable datasets, which hinders academic and policy research.

TikTok responded that it has provided data to almost 1,000 research teams and remains committed to transparency. However, the company noted that the DSA’s data-sharing obligations sometimes conflict with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), making it difficult to comply with both laws simultaneously. TikTok urged European regulators to offer clarity on how these two frameworks should be balanced.

Beyond Europe, the investigation may strain relations with the United States. American officials have previously criticized the EU for imposing regulatory burdens on U.S.-based tech firms. U.S. FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson recently warned companies that censoring or modifying content to satisfy foreign governments could violate U.S. law. Former President Donald Trump has also expressed opposition to EU digital rules and even threatened tariffs against countries enforcing them.

For now, the Commission’s investigation continues. If confirmed, the case could set a major precedent for how global social media companies manage user safety, transparency, and accountability under Europe’s strict online governance laws.


Meta's Platforms Rank Worst in Social Media Privacy Rankings: Report

Meta’s Instagram, WhatsApp, and Facebook have once again been flagged as the most privacy-violating social media apps. According to Incogni’s Social Media Privacy Ranking report 2025, Meta and TikTok are at the bottom of the list. Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) has also received poor rankings in various categories, but has done better than Meta in a few categories.

Discord, Pinterest, and Quora perform well

The report analyzed 15 of the most widely used social media platforms globally, measuring them against 14 privacy criteria organized into six different categories: AI data use, user control, ease of access, regulatory transgressions, transparency, and data collection. The research methodology focused on how an average user could understand and control privacy policies.

Discord, Pinterest, and Quora have done best in the 2025 ranking. Discord is placed first, thanks to its stance on not giving user data for training of AI models. Pinterest ranks second, thanks to its strong user options and fewer regulatory penalties. Quora came third thanks to its limited user data collection.

Why were Meta platforms penalized?

But the Meta platforms were penalized strongly in various categories. Facebook was penalized for frequent regulatory fines, such as GDPR rules in Europe, and penalties in the US and other regions. Instagram and WhatsApp received heavy penalties due to policies allowing the collection of sensitive personal data, such as sexual orientation and health. X faced penalties for vast data collection

Penalties against X

X was penalized for vast data collection and privacy fines from the past, but it still ranked above Meta and TikTok in some categories. X was among the easiest platforms to delete accounts from, and also provided information to government organizations at was lower rate than other platforms. Yet, X allows user data to be trained for AI models, which has impacted its overall privacy score.

“One of the core principles motivating Incogni’s research here is the idea that consent to have personal information gathered and processed has to be properly informed to be valid and meaningful. It’s research like this that arms users with not only the facts but also the tools to inform their choices,” Incogni said in its blog. 

Beware of Pig Butchering Scams That Steal Your Money

Beware of Pig Butchering Scams That Steal Your Money

Pig butchering, a term we usually hear in the meat market, sadly, has also become a lethal form of cybercrime that can cause complete financial losses for the victims. 

Pig Butchering is a “form of investment fraud in the crypto space where scammers build relationships with targets through social engineering and then lure them to invest crypto in fake opportunities or platforms created by the scammer,” according to The Department of Financial Protection & Innovation. 

Pig butchering has squeezed billions of dollars from victims globally. Cambodian-based Huione Group gang stole over $4 billion from August 2021 to January 2025, the New York Post reported.

How to stay safe from pig butchering?

Individuals should watch out for certain things to avoid getting caught in these extortion schemes. Scammers often target seniors and individuals who are not well aware about cybercrime. The National Council on Aging cautions that such scams begin with receiving messages from scammers pretending to be someone else. Never respond or send money to random people who text you online, even if the story sounds compelling. Scammers rely on earning your trust, a sob story is one easy way for them to trick you. 

Another red flag is receiving SMS or social media texts that send you to other platforms like WeChat or Telegram, which have fewer regulations. Scammers also convince users to invest their money, which they claim to return with big profits. In one incident, the scammer even asked the victim to “go to a loan shark” to get the money.

Stopping scammers

Last year, Meta blocked over 2 million accounts that were promoting crypto investment scams such as pig butchering. Businesses have increased efforts to combat this issue, but the problem still very much exists. A major step is raising awareness via public posts broadcasting safety tips among individuals to prevent them from falling prey to such scams. 

Organizations have now started releasing warnings in Instagram DMs and Facebook Messenger warning users about “potentially suspicious interactions or cold outreach from people you don’t know”, which is a good initiative. Banks have started tipping of customers about the dangers of scams when sending money online. 

Florida Scraps Controversial Law That Threatened Online Privacy

 



A proposed law in Florida that raised concerns about online privacy has now been officially dropped. The bill, called “Social Media Use by Minors,” aimed to place tighter controls on how children use social media. While it was introduced to protect young users, many experts argued it would have done more harm than good — not just for kids, but for all internet users.

One major issue with the bill was its demand for social media platforms to change how they protect users’ messages. Apps like WhatsApp, Signal, iMessage, and Instagram use something called end-to-end encryption. This feature makes messages unreadable to anyone except the person you're talking to. Not even the app itself can access the content.

The bill, however, would have required these platforms to create a special way for authorities to unlock private messages if they had a legal order. But cybersecurity professionals have long said that once such a "backdoor" exists, it can't be safely limited to just the police. Criminals, hackers, or even foreign spies could find and misuse it. Creating a backdoor for some means weakening protection for all.

The bill also included other rules, like banning temporary or disappearing messages for children and letting parents view everything their child does on social media. Critics worried this would put young users at greater risk, especially those needing privacy in situations like abuse or bullying.

Even though the Florida Senate passed the bill, the House of Representatives refused to approve it. On May 3, 2025, the bill was officially removed from further discussion. Digital privacy advocates, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, welcomed this move, calling it a step in the right direction for protecting online privacy.

This isn’t the first time governments have tried and failed to weaken encryption. Similar efforts have been blocked in other parts of the world, like France and the European Union, for the same reason: once secure messaging is weakened, it puts everyone at risk.

For now, users in Florida can breathe a sigh of relief. The bill’s failure shows growing recognition of how vital strong encryption is in keeping our personal information safe online.

Meta Removes Independent Fact Checkers, Replaces With "Community Notes"


Meta to remove fact-checkers

Meta is dumping independent fact-checkers on Instagram and Facebook, similar to what X (earlier Twitter) did, replacing them with “community notes” where users’ comments decide the accuracy of a post.

On Tuesday, Mark Zuckerberg in a video said third-party moderators were "too politically biased" and it was "time to get back to our roots around free expression".

Tech executives are trying to build better relations with the new US President Donald Trump who will take oath this month, the new move is a step in that direction.  

Republican Party and Meta

The Republican party and Trump have called out Meta for its fact-checking policies, stressing it censors right-wing voices on its platform.

After the new policy was announced, Trump said in a news conference he was pleased with Meta’s decision to have  "come a long way".

Online anti-hate speech activists expressed disappointment with the shift, claiming it was motivated by a desire to align with Trump.

“Zuckerberg's announcement is a blatant attempt to cozy up to the incoming Trump administration – with harmful implications. Claiming to avoid "censorship" is a political move to avoid taking responsibility for hate and disinformation that platforms encourage and facilitate,” said Ava Lee of Global Witness. This organization sees itself as trying to bring big tech like Meta accountable.

Copying X

The present fact-checking program of Meta was introduced in 2016, it sends posts that seem false or misleading to independent fact-checking organizations to judge their credibility. 

Posts marked as misleading have labels attached to them, giving users more information, and move down in viewers’ social media feeds. This will now be replaced by community notes, starting in the US. Meta has no “immediate plans” to remove third-party fact-checkers in the EU or the UK.

The new community notes move has been copied from platform X, which was started after Elon Musk bought Twitter. 

It includes people with opposing opinions agreeing on notes that provide insight or explanation to disputed posts. 

We will allow more speech by lifting restrictions on some topics that are part of mainstream discourse and focusing our enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations. We will take a more personalized approach to political content, so that people who want to see more of it in their feeds can.

Why Did Turkey Suddenly Ban Instagram? The Shocking Reason Revealed


 

On Friday, Turkey's Information and Communication Technologies Authority (ICTA) unexpectedly blocked Instagram access across the country. The ICTA, responsible for overseeing internet regulations, did not provide any specific reason for the ban. However, according to reports from Yeni Safak, a newspaper supportive of the government, the ban was likely a response to Instagram removing posts by Turkish users that expressed condolences for Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh's death.

Many Turkish users faced difficulties accessing Instagram following the ban. Fahrettin Altun, the communications director for the Turkish presidency, publicly condemned Instagram, accusing it of censoring messages of sympathy for Haniyeh, whom he called a martyr. This incident has sparked significant controversy within Turkey.

Haniyeh’s Death and Its Aftermath

Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas and a close associate of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was killed in an attack in Tehran on Wednesday, an act allegedly carried out by Israel. His death prompted widespread reactions in Turkey, with many taking to social media to express their condolences and solidarity, leading to the conflict with Instagram.

A History of Social Media Restrictions in Turkey

This is not the first instance of social media restrictions in Turkey. The country, with a population of 85 million, includes over 50 million Instagram users, making such bans highly impactful. From April 2017 to January 2020, Turkey blocked access to Wikipedia due to articles that linked the Turkish government to extremism, tellingly limiting the flow of information.

This recent action against Instagram is part of a broader pattern of conflicts between the Turkish government and social media companies. In April, Meta, the parent company of Facebook, had to suspend its Threads network in Turkey after authorities blocked its information sharing with Instagram. This surfaces ongoing tensions between Turkey and major social media firms.

The blockage of Instagram illustrates the persistent struggle between the Turkish government and social media platforms over content regulation and freedom of expression. These restrictions pose crucial challenges to the dissemination of information and public discourse, affecting millions who rely on these platforms for news and communication. 

Turkey's decision to block Instagram is a testament to the complex dynamics between the government and digital platforms. As the situation pertains, it will be essential to observe the responses from both Turkish authorities and the affected social media companies to grasp the broader implications for digital communication and freedom of speech in Turkey.