Comparing Fake Account Detection on Facebook and Twitter

Photo of Paul Ausick
By Paul Ausick Updated Published
This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.
Comparing Fake Account Detection on Facebook and Twitter

© bigtunaonline / iStock

By Gene Munster of Loup Ventures

[Today], Facebook and Twitter will testify in front of the Senate regarding the use of their platforms to influence elections. Fake accounts are the starting point for bad actors to operate on social media. To compare how effective Twitter and Facebook are at detecting fake accounts, we created several fictitious users on each platform. Bottom line: it’s pretty easy to create fake social media accounts.

  • Facebook better than Twitter: Facebook was better at detecting fakes than Twitter. While all seven of the accounts we created with only basic profile information were flagged, Facebook still has room for improvement. We were able to create five profiles with more detailed bios that were not detected.
  • Fake email more difficult to create: In order to create fake social accounts, fake emails can be used. However, only so many email accounts can be linked to one phone number. We created one Gmail account without providing a phone number, and it was flagged for suspicious activity.
  • Facebook combats fake news: Facebook has been making a push to reduce distribution of fake news and harmful content as reflected in new content rules and the creation of a “Fake News War Room.”
  • Twitter combats fake news: Twitter has set up the Ad Transparency Center to better inform users of what they are seeing. The company has also created a certification process for “issue ads” to verify the identity of the advertisers.

[nativounit]

Faking Out Facebook

Good at detecting basic fakes: Facebook detected all seven fake accounts we created with basic information (only profile picture and name). In order to regain access to those accounts, we were asked to send in pictures of ourselves for verification by an AI agent. All accounts used a fake Gmail or Yahoo account for initial email verification.

Fast response: All accounts were flagged within 30 minutes of creation.

Bad at detecting detailed fakes: With a little more information, it is still easy to create a fake account. After our initial seven basic fake accounts were detected, we created five more fake accounts with additional information, such as profession, school, and relationship status. These more sophisticated accounts were not detected by Facebook’s AI as of four days following their creation.

Faking Out Twitter

Easy to fool: All we needed to provide was a username, password, and email. Both fake Twitter accounts are still fully accessible as of six days following their creation. One account has a valid email address and one has an invalid one (both Gmail).

Poor email verification: Without accepting the verification email, we have full use of Twitter.

Conclusion

It’s pretty easy to create fake social media accounts, but what’s more important is how the platforms handle ads and pages created and promoted by these accounts. Both companies have taken important steps to decrease the spread of fake news. Former Facebook Chief Security Officer, Alex Stamos, has said it is too late to protect the US for the midterm elections, so we’ll need to wait longer to see the effectiveness of these programs.

Disclaimer: We actively write about the themes in which we invest or may invest: virtual reality, augmented reality, artificial intelligence, and robotics. From time to time, we may write about companies that are in our portfolio. As managers of the portfolio, we may earn carried interest, management fees or other compensation from such portfolio. Content on this site including opinions on specific themes in technology, market estimates, and estimates and commentary regarding publicly traded or private companies is not intended for use in making any investment decisions and provided solely for informational purposes. We hold no obligation to update any of our projections and the content on this site should not be relied upon. We express no warranties about any estimates or opinions we make.

[recirclink id=485588]

[wallst_email_signup]

Photo of Paul Ausick
About the Author Paul Ausick →

Paul Ausick has been writing for a673b.bigscoots-temp.com for more than a decade. He has written extensively on investing in the energy, defense, and technology sectors. In a previous life, he wrote technical documentation and managed a marketing communications group in Silicon Valley.

He has a bachelor's degree in English from the University of Chicago and now lives in Montana, where he fishes for trout in the summer and stays inside during the winter.

Featured Reads

Our top personal finance-related articles today. Your wallet will thank you later.

Continue Reading

Top Gaining Stocks

CBOE Vol: 1,568,143
PSKY Vol: 12,285,993
STX Vol: 7,378,346
ORCL Vol: 26,317,675
DDOG Vol: 6,247,779

Top Losing Stocks

LKQ
LKQ Vol: 4,367,433
CLX Vol: 13,260,523
SYK Vol: 4,519,455
MHK Vol: 1,859,865
AMGN Vol: 3,818,618