Facebook hasn’t had the best year so far in 2018, with the Cambridge Analytica scandal exposing rampant misuse of user data and voter manipulation on both sides of the Atlantic. While investigations are still on-going, Cambridge Analytica has ceased to exist, at least in its best-known form; the company folded and its notorious hierarchy has moved on to pastures new.

Another company has been drawing attention amidst this scandal, however; Crimson Hexagon (CH).

The name itself sounds like something out of a James Bond film. Daniel Craig jumping through windows and cracking heads to find the elusive supervillain at the head of the organisation – who probably wears an eyepatch and employs scores of assassins.

As great as that sounds, sadly it isn’t the case. CH is just another data analytics firm alleged to have abused user data.

Suspended

Facebook suspended CH, a Boston-based firm while it continues to investigate concerns about the collection and sharing of user data.

The company – which claims to offer “consumer insights” – has previously secured contracts with government agencies around the world. These deals are what may have landed the firm in hot water, with Facebook investigating claims that they may have been in violation of its policies on user surveillance.

According to the CH website, the firm works with more than one trillion social media posts taken from social media platforms such as; Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and a host of others and gallantly boasts of its ability to analyse in excess of 150 million photographs posted online per day.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), whose investigation broke the story, paints another depressing, highly concerning picture. According to the publication, CH has several contracts to analyse Facebook data for clients that include a Russian nonprofit called the Civil Society Development Foundation (which has ties to the Kremlin) and a number of US Government agencies, including:

• The State Department
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
• US Secret Service

In addition to its work with government agencies, the company also had deals with a number of high-profile companies such as Adidas, Samsung and even the BBC.

The WSJ also reported that the company failed in an attempt to secure a Defense Department contract that would see the firm monitor online communications by members of the terrorist group, ISIS. Its Russian contract was equally as bizarre and concerning; measuring the popularity of Vladimir Putin.

Violating the Rules

Facebook allows for the gathering and sharing of data with businesses, it’s why you’ll have all those freakishly relevant ads popping up on your newsfeed from time to time. As it stands, there is no evidence to suggest that CH acted in a similar manner to Cambridge Analytica by scraping user data. However, Facebook’s investigation suggests there is something concerning.

CH could have broken the social media platforms’ rules if data was used to create surveillance tools or to actively deceive users.

Speaking to the BBC, Facebook’s head of partnerships, Ime Archibong clarified the company’s rules around the use of data, stating: “People can share their information with developers on Facebook and Instagram – just as they can when they download an app on their phone,”

Archibong also said that developers are allowed to use “public or aggregated information to produce anonymised insights” for business purposes.

If Facebook’s investigation finds that CH had used data sets to perform surveillance then the company could be subject to the same scrutiny as Cambridge Analytica.

CH’s chief technology officer, Chris Bingham, took to the company blog on Friday to clarify the situation, stating: “CH only collects publicly available social media data that anyone can access.”

Bingham added that “the real conversation” was not specifically about a single analytics provider, or perhaps even a single social network such as Facebook. Instead, he says, the conversation should be about the “broader role and use” of public data available online.

A valid point, however, the post itself appears to be an attempt to allay fears that the company’s actions mirrored those of Cambridge Analytica.