>>spooky+(OP)
yup, it appears facebook is creating a "xxx@facebook.com" email address for every profile..

>>spooky+(OP)
I fail to see how this is a MITM attack

>>spooky+(OP)
Probably for the better, especially if your email/profile are public.

It makes sense for Facebook to do this because they want all Communication to go through them. If you want people to connect to you directly, don't use facebook. Or put your email in your abou section.

>>akashs+R
If someone wanted to send you a top secret email (as opposed to a facebook message), they'll send it to your email address, except now your email address is listed as @facebook. The "attack" assumes someone doesn't already know your email, has something top secret that they don't want facebook to know, and are so retarded they don't look at the address they're sending to.

It's a MITM attack on one particular means of distributing your email address, but it's not an attack on your email at all.

>>MrEnig+11
No. If I put my email address in my Facebook profile, it's because I want people to be able to have my email address. For the same reason, if I put my phone number in my Facebook profile, it is because I want people to be able to call me at that number.

I put the address there. It pisses me off that Facebook feels free to change my profile behind my back. How many people actually look at their own content information on Facebook? Precious few. Facebook is counting on this.

>>akashs+R
It is absolutely an MITM attack, if for no other reason that your email has no presumption of privacy once it is in the hands of Facebook. Read the TOS. They can do whatever they like with the data that passes through your account.

They are counting on your not noticing that they changed your publicly displayed email address, so that instead of a message going straight to you and bypassing facebook.com, it now goes to facebook.com. You still get the message. So do they.

>>teilo+j1
I'm not arguing what is best for the customer. Just best for Facebook. It's their service an they get to do what they want. It sucks, and I wish it wouldn't happen but it does.

I know amazon does this for seller accounts, and I've run across it a few more places as well (craigslist, etc). Although Craigslist gives you the option to not obscure it.

I kind of saw the writing on the wall when the messaging platform was announced. They are trying to replace email for most people.

>>spooky+(OP)
I noticed this undesirable change on my profile, and promptly corrected it.

This is yet another of not-quite-shady but not-quite-agreeable adjustments we've come to expect from Facebook. It will make it more difficult for me to look up a friend's e-mail address when I want to (since many users won't realize the address on their profile has silently changed). It consolidates Facebook's grip on people's connections, moving Facebook's position closer to a replacement for e-mail (rather than a complement). This is a position I will always reject. Long live e-mail!

>>teduna+b1
Be fair; anyone who wants to send me a "top secret" email, but has to go to facebook to find my email address; I don't want them sending me their "secrets".

>>spooky+(OP)
People send important email without encryption and digital signatures?

>>domado+E1
I also purposefully exposed my email address and it was replaced by an @facebook.com address.

>>jrockw+93
I notice that your HN profile and your personal home page give an email address, but no public key.

>>holler+g5
On the other hand, a quick search on the MIT keyserver reveals:

http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xD...

>>spooky+(OP)
If you want your real email address to be shown instead, this procedure seems to work:

On your Timeline page go to Update Info, then click Contact Info. Set the fake address to "Hidden from Timeline" and your real address to "Shown on Timeline" (assuming you do want your real address visible, of course).

I hope this saves some time for others; it took a little while for me to figure it out. Other things I tried: Deleting the fake address (you can't). Setting the fake address as visible to only me (had no apparent effect, though perhaps it made the fake address invisible to others).

>>spooky+(OP)
I've got to say, for me, Facebook has largely replaced personal email (you never do know which of someone's three email addresses they actually use), but hiding your personal email in favour of their own system? That's just sleazy.

>>MrEnig+D1
Just best for Facebook. It's their service an they get to do what they want.

This sentiment seems to be implied for pretty much any decision made by any company, so is it even useful to mention? And if it's true, that's still not going to stop me from complaining when a company makes a decision I don't like.

So, why mention it?

>>jrockw+k5
...which 99% of the internet have never heard of. I was using PGP in 1992 and I had either forgotten or never known there was a public keyserver at MIT.

>>noobis+k2
Right, but that's not a choice you get to make.

>>anigbr+pK1
...making it the best spam filter yet discovered

>>presty+H
You've actually had <username>@facebook.com available for receiving messages and for logging in (I login with ross.masters for example) for at least a year - what they've done here is to hide your displayed emails and only show this one (which is way out of line).

>>anigbr+pK1
99% of the Internet has never heard of cryptography, either. But among the 1% that has, the same 1% knows about keyservers. (The keyservers generally sync with each other, so you don't have to use MIT's keyserver. It is just the one that I happen to use.)