Privacy

I dream of the day when I can stop writing about this.

I spent years hearing about the social stigma that surrounded online dating. Then it was "Hooray - the stigma is over!" And now media outlets are halfway back to where they started, pulling a massive "Just kidding!" on all of us. These days, the headlines proclaim that, although we are using dating sites and mobile apps to find partners more than ever before, we're still kinda embarrassed by it.

Good grief. Can't we just make up our minds already?

The latest to jump on the Just Kidding bandwagon is The Washington Post, which recently published an article that bluntly addressed the problem: "As dating apps grow in popularity, people still feel some stigma."

"More and more people are doing it," the article begins, "but no one wants to talk about it. On the record, that is." There's no doubt about the first half of that statement. The recent Pew study on online dating found that 11% of American adults have given it a try - a figure that shows a massive jump from the 3% it was at five years ago. Among Internet users who were currently single and looking for a partner, 38% had decided to give online dating or mobile apps a go.

Yet, according to the same study, 21% of Internet users also agree with the statement: "People who use online dating sites are desperate." That's an eight-percentage-point decline from the Pew study in 2005, but still...ouch. Why are we still so inclined to pass judgment on those who use their laptops and smartphones to find love? Especially when we've probably tried it ourselves (or at least been tempted)?

"I think people don't like to admit that they are having trouble in their romantic life," said Eli Finkel, a social psychology professor at Northwestern University. "That concern is misplaced. It is totally normal to figure out who is compatible for you." Finkel, who published a critical analysis of online dating last year, has seen everything online dating has to offer, from the highest highs to the lowest lows, but he remains a firm supporter. "In general," he said, "it is a great thing that exists."

On the ground, however, feelings are still mixed. The Washington Post spoke to one man who said that he and his friends consciously keep online dating out of most of their conversations and off their social media profiles. "We don't want to put something that is supposed to be like a dating, personal ad into our real world," he says. "I think that delineation, that separation from online-date persona and in-person social situations, is a real thing."

Another man praised the anonymity offered by dating services, because he doesn't think the world is ready for people like potential bosses to search his name and see it tied to the latest dating mobile app. "More and more people are having those conversations," he said. "But we're still not at the point where everyone is comfortable."

A recent survey from Harris Interactive of 5,517 UK citizens found that one in 12 (8%) users of social media sites have been the victims of online abuse in some form or another. That part of the story won't surprise anyone who's spent even a marginal amount of time on the Internet. We've seen time and time again that when you put people behind a screen name, the anonymity creates a sense of invincibility and depersonalization that makes it easier to bully others.

The part of the story may be a surprise to some is the response we are taking to online abuse. Only a third (35%) of participants in the study said they reported their abuse to the social media platform on which it took place. Half said they would have reported it, if only they knew how. Another 12% said they chose to respond to the problem by turning the situation around and bullying their abusers.

"It's interesting to note the high percentage of people who say they would have reported the abuse had they known how to, or if the process was simpler," Lee Langford, research director for telecoms, media, technology and entertainment at Harris Interactive, said. "More steps need to be taken by networking sites, such as Facebook, Twitter and Ask.fm, to increase the effectiveness of reporting tools to prevent trolling."

Another survey, conducted by campaign group Bullies Out, found that 50% of their response pool had been victims of cyber bullies, some of whom were as young as seven years old. The CEO of BeatBullying, Emma-Jane Cross, believes both the problem and the solution lie with the social networking sites themselves. "Social networking sites need to take their users' safety seriously," she said, "which includes making reporting procedures much clearer and ensuring a swift response when abuse is recorded."

The difficulty in reporting abuse on websites is that it isn't just used for reporting abuse. Even the system for reporting abuse is abused. In many cases, a disgruntled user files an unwarranted abuse report simply to get another user in trouble and exact revenge. There is no system in place to distinguish malicious abuse reports from real abuse reports, meaning that many are never taken seriously.

So what can you do? We can't eradicate abuse from the Internet completely, but there are a few steps that can be taken to decrease the likelihood of bullying:

• Only post things you want the public to know. Once something is online, it is no longer under your control.
• Guard your personal information closely, and ask your friends to do the same. Request that they not post personal info, negative comments, check-ins, or any other information that you're not comfortable sharing.
• Don't say or do anything online you wouldn't in person. It may seem easier to express yourself when you are not face-to-face, but don't forget that online communication has real-life consequences.
• Always report inappropriate behavior, harassing messages, and abusive comments to the site administrators. Even a small amount of action is better than no action.

Are you concerned about your privacy when you use online dating sites? EFF is, and you should be too.

What is EFF? EFF is the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an organization dedicated to confronting cutting-edge issues defending free speech, privacy, innovation, and consumer rights in today's digital world. Of course, no discussion of today's digital world would be complete without a conversation about online dating sites. When EFF examined eight popular online dating sites to see how well they safeguard user privacy, they found that the majority of the sites tested did not take even basic security precautions.

We already took a look at how well the two most popular free dating sites, Plenty of Fish and OkCupid, performed on EFF's tests, and the results were less than stellar. Now the question is: does paying for a dating service guarantee better protection of your privacy? Let's take a look at how major dating sites eHarmony and Match stacked up against the freebies...

Neither Match nor eHarmony uses HTTPS, standard Web encryption, by default. By failing to use HTTPS, these sites expose their users to eavesdroppers when accessed from shared networks. All it takes is free software such as Wireshark for someone to access data that is transmitted in plaintext. This is potentially worrisome on any website, but it's particularly distressing on dating sites where information of a sensitive nature is routinely posted.

The next factor tested by EFF was whether or not the sites are free of mixed content. Mixed content is a problem that occurs when the site is primarily secured with HTTPS, but delivers part of its content over an insecure connection. Even if a page is encrypted over HTTPS, it may still be possible for an eavesdropper to access portions of the page if it displays mixed content. In some cases, EFF warns, a sophisticated attacker could even rewrite the entire page. Both eHarmony and Match contain mixed content.

EFF also tested whether the sites use secure cookies or HSTS. Failing to use secure cookies, which both eHarmony and Match are guilty of, can expose users to session hijacking. HSTS (HTTPS Strict Transport Security) can be used to request the use of HTTPS when communicating with a specific website. The user's browser will remember this request and automatically turn on HTTPS when connecting to the site in the future. Once again, both Match and eHarmony failed to employ HSTS.

Finally, EFF investigated the sites' policies on deleting data after the closure of a user's account. eHarmony's policy was deemed "vague," while on Match.com the fate of a user's information wasn't discussed at all.

So, where privacy is concerned, does it pay to pay? According to EFF, the answer is no. There is no significant difference between free dating sites and paid dating sites when it comes to privacy and security practices.

Smart online daters are concerned about their privacy no matter what online dating site they use, but those less familiar with Internet privacy issues might assume that major dating sites like Match.com and eHarmony.com are safer than their free counterparts. Does "free" automatically mean unsafe? Does "paid" automatically mean secure?

EFF, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an organization dedicated to defending your rights in the digital world, conducted an investigation into the privacy and security practices of major online dating sites to see just how well they're safeguarding your privacy. Two of the sites they tested, Plenty of Fish and OKCupid, are the Web's most notorious free dating services. How well did they stack up against the paid competition?

Neither Plenty of Fish nor OkCupid uses HTTPS by default. For the less tech-savvy among you, HTTPS is standard Web encryption used to secure websites (often those that allow financial transactions). Without HTTPS, users can be vulnerable to eavesdroppers when they use shared networks like those found in coffee shops or libraries.

EFF also found that neither Plenty of Fish nor OkCupid is free of mixed content, meaning that even if certain elements of the site are generally secured with HTTPS, other portions of its content are served over an insecure connection. Again, it may be possible for an eavesdropper to see the images on a page or other content when the page is not properly secured.

EFF also tested whether Plenty of Fish and OkCupid use secure cookies. A "cookie" contains authentication information that helps the site recognize you and allows for easy access to information in your account. It's cookies that allow you to return to a site and be logged in without having to reenter your password. If the cookies are not secure, an attacker can trick your browser and use your cookies to take over your session with the site.

The last thing EFF tested was whether or not the site deleted your data after your account was closed. Both Plenty of Fish and OkCupid were vague about the details. After looking at the sites' privacy policies and terms of service, EFF could not find a clear description of what happens to a user's data after deleting their account.

Plenty Of Fish says "We keep your information only as long as we need it for legitimate business purposes and to meet any legal requirements," but who knows what that really means? OkCupid says they "may still retain certain information associated with your account for analytical purposes and recordkeeping integrity," as well as for a host of other things.

Things look pretty bad for Plenty of Fish and OkCupid when it's all laid out like that, but how do they compare to other dating sites? Stay tuned to find out...

Unless you've been living under a rock lately, you've gotten an earful about the National Security Administration's efforts to monitor your phone calls and online activity. Sure, that's scary stuff, but it's only one piece of the privacy puzzle. What about all the other organizations you're voluntarily giving information to? Just about everywhere you go online, you're leaving a digital footprint and odds are you have no idea who's seeing it.

So, who exactly has access to the personal information you put online?

To answer that question, NPR investigated one of the greatest sources of personal data on the Web: online dating sites. Most users don't hesitate to fill out the lengthy questionnaires on sites like Match.com because they believe it's the best way to find a compatible partner. But when NPR sat down with Ashkan Soltani, a digital privacy specialist who used to work at the Federal Trade Commission, he showed exactly how unprivate personal information can be.

Soltani set up a fake account on OkCupid to demonstrate how private companies track what users are doing online. He selected the "Often" options under the questions about drinking and drug use, then launched two software programs - Collusion and MITM Proxy - to get a look at what goes on behind-the-scenes.

The Collision program revealed that almost 50 companies were tracking Soltani's computer as he browsed OkCupid, most of which were either advertising firms or companies that collect data to sell to ad firms. The MITM Proxy program exposed the kind of information those companies were receiving from OkCupid. Some got basic data, like age and gender, but others obtained much more personal details. In fact, least one learned that Soltani uses drugs "often."

Of course, it's not just OkCupid that collects personal data, and every online dating site has an explanation for why they do it. Data collecting, they argue, allows them to personalize their service in order to improve user experience. As you search for dates online, your dating site gets a better idea of the kind person you're looking for. The site becomes "smarter," and its matching algorithm becomes better at refining your results.

To some, it's creepy. To others, it's helpful. What is clear is this: there isn't much that can be done about it, unless you choose the non-option of staying off the Internet completely. All that's left is to think carefully about what data you choose to share, and to remember that private information is rarely private online.

Zoosk was made aware recently that possibly some of their members passwords were found on a third-party website. Zoosk takes security seriously and has launched an investigation:

So far, we have not found evidence of our network being compromised. Additionally we have not received reports of unauthorized access to members’ accounts...

To err on the side of caution Zoosk has required some members to reset their passwords.

Zoosk is smart to get on top of this potential security threat right away. Hopefully it is a false alarm but it is always best to take steps to ensure everyone’s information is safe. A number of dating sites have been targeted over the last few years including Plenty of fish which was hacked in February of 2011.

For more information on this potential security issue you can read the Zoosk blog.