Meta公司正在反驳一名记者的指控，该记者称Meta的人工智能工具Muse在未经用户许可的情况下读取了用户的私人信息。此前，Inc.杂志的专栏作家Jason Aten曾发表过一篇详细报道，指出这一问题。随后，Meta公司的通讯副总裁Andy Stone对此进行了回应，明确表示该公司认为其产品并未在未经用户同意的情况下擅自读取用户的私人信息。
Meta is refuting a journalist’s claim that its AI agent Muse read the user’s private messages without permission. Following an earlier report from Inc. columnist Jason Aten that detailed the issue, Meta VP of Communications Andy Stone pushed back, making it clear that the company does not believe its product did this without the user’s consent.
Stone在X平台上写道：“Muse应用程序中的‘Messages’功能完全是用户自愿选择的（即用户必须主动启用该功能）。用户需要同时启用‘Full Disk Access’（全盘访问权限）和‘Messages Connector’（消息数据连接组件），Muse才能读取用户的消息内容。除非用户主动授权，否则它根本无法读取用户的消息。”尽管Meta公司进行了否认，但许多人仍对该公司的说法表示怀疑。
“The Messages integration in the Muse app for Mac is entirely opt-in,” Stone wrote on X in response to the claims made by the piece. “You have to enable both Full Disk Access and the Messages connector for Muse to be able to read your Messages content. It can’t read your Messages unless you do this.”Despite Meta’s denial, many people are still suspicious that Meta isn’t being truthful.
这并不令人意外——毕竟这家科技巨头多年来一直存在滥用消费者数据的问题，导致过多次诉讼、违反联邦贸易委员会（FTC）的规定以及被处以罚款。就在几天前，新墨西哥州的一个陪审团裁定Meta公司在2018年Cambridge Analytica数据泄露事件中误导了用户，使其数据使用政策存在问题。
That’s not surprising, given the tech giant’s years of mishandling consumer data, which has led to lawsuits, FTC violations, and fines. Just days ago, for instance, a New Mexico jury determined the tech giant had misled users about its data practices in a case that resulted from the 2018 Cambridge Analytica data breach scandal.
用户是否能够信任Meta公司的产品，将成为该公司能否赢得人工智能市场的关键因素。虽然目前Muse的应用程序表现良好，仍在App Store上排名第一，但如果类似指控不断出现（无论这些指控是否属实），Meta的声誉很可能会受到严重损害。事实上，该公司应该直接与相关记者进行沟通，查明问题发生的真正原因，而不仅仅是简单地否认事实。
Whether users can trust Muse will be a deciding factor in whether or not Meta wins the consumer AI market. Although its app is faring well now, and remains No. 1 on the App Store, Meta’s reputation may not recover if more reports like this emerge, true or not. If anything, the company should be engaging with the journalist directly to determine how this could have possibly happened, instead of just denying that it did.
Meta 的 Stone 发布的官方声明，是继 Meta 超级智能实验室高管戴维·辛格尔顿在 Threads 上直接回应 Aten 后作出的。辛格尔顿的技术性回复更为具体，他 explained，要允许 Muse 在 Mac 上读取用户的信息，用户必须授予一组权限，这涉及“应用层级的三个独立权限步骤，以及 macOS 内置的系统级保护措施”。他说，即使 Muse 应用存在漏洞，这些机制“也不可能被绕过”。
Stone’s official statement from Meta follows a more technical reply from Meta Superintelligence Labs executive David Singleton, who responded directly to Aten on Threads, explaining that the set of permissions a user must grant to let Muse read their messages on the Mac involves “three separate steps of application-level permissions and built-in macOS system-level protections.”He said these “can’t be circumvented even if the Muse application had a bug.”
这些步骤要求用户明确选择向 Muse 授予“完全磁盘访问权限”，随后用户才能选择授予 Muse 对“信息”应用的访问级别，即“无”“只读”或“读取”。如果未启用“完全磁盘访问权限”，这些选项将显示为灰色，无法选择。
The steps involve explicitly choosing to grant Muse Full Disk Access, which would then allow the user to choose what level of access Muse is being granted to the Messages app (i.e., None, Read only, or Read). If Full Disk Access is not enabled, these options are grayed out.
此外，在授予“完全磁盘访问权限”时，系统会调出 macOS“设置”界面，用户必须再次手动确认其有意执行此操作。辛格尔顿写道，这样做会触发 Muse 应用完全重启，因此用户在不知情的情况下意外作出这种选择的可能性就更低。
In addition, when allowing Full Disk Access, the dialog invokes the macOS Settings user interface, where the user has to again manually confirm that they intend to take this action. Doing this triggers a full restart of the Muse app, Singleton wrote, which makes it even less likely that such a choice could be made accidentally without the user’s knowledge.
然而，Aten 声称，Muse 读取他的信息时，“完全磁盘访问权限”并未启用。他还说，当 he 要求 Muse 解释是如何做到这一点时，AI 表示自己正在同步他的“设备通知”。Aten 因此认为，Muse 是把 Mac 上收到的横幅通知文本转发给了 AI 代理。
However, Aten’s report claimed that when Muse read his messages, Full Disk Access was off. He also said that when he asked Muse to explain how this occurred, the AI said that it was syncing his “device notifications.”That means, Aten believes, that Muse was passing along the text of his incoming banner notifications on the Mac to the AI agent.
辛格尔顿对此也提出异议，称该 AI 陷入了混淆，并对发生的事情作出了错误解释。随后，他指向了 Meta 关于 Muse 安全架构和漏洞赏金流程的页面。
Singleton disputed this, too, saying that the AI was confused and gave an incorrect explanation of what happened. He then pointed to Meta’s page about Muse’s security architecture and bug bounty process.
简而言之，该公司的回应 Essentially 是，Aten 所描述的情况不仅没有发生，而且不可能发生。
In short, the company’s response is essentially that what Aten said happened did not and could not have happened.
这并非Muse被指越界的唯一事件，而且很可能也不会是最后一次。另一位用户、视频博主马特·罗布最近表示，Muse在处理他在Facebook Marketplace上出售物品的任务时出现了失误，导致他的地址被分享，买家在他根本不在家时找上了门。据Singleton在Threads上的回复，他似乎正在调查此事，这表明至少在这件事上，公司认为可能是自己的过错。
This is not the only incident where Muse has allegedly overstepped and won’t likely be the last. Another user, YouTuber Matt Robb, recently said that Muse mishandled a task in which he was selling things on Facebook Marketplace, leading to his address being shared and a buyer showing up when he wasn’t even home. Singleton is apparently looking into that one, per his response on Threads, suggesting that the company believes this one, at least, could be its fault.