Privacy-focused social networks: options, risks, and how to protect yourself

Android Guides » General » Privacy-focused social networks: options, risks, and how to protect yourself

In recent years, we've witnessed veritable stampedes of users from one social network to another. This almost never happens because a revolutionary platform has emerged, but rather because the established platforms change the rules of the game: new data policies, increased tracking, opaque algorithms, or the use of our content to train artificial intelligence systems without our knowledge.

If you're considering switching platforms or at least reviewing where you are now, it's crucial to understand how major social networks, video services, and community websites handle your data today. Based on a comprehensive study by Incogni on social media privacy in 2025, along with other analyses and real-world examples, we'll break down which platforms best respect your privacy, what risks lie behind each business model, and what you can do to protect your digital footprint.

Ranking of social networks according to their respect for privacy

Incogni's report compares fifteen major social media platforms (traditional networks, video services, and community websites), evaluating everything from the amount of data they collect to their history of fines and security breaches. The lower their scores, the more privacy-conscious they are.

In the overall ranking, the best and worst are separated by more than double the score . The top 10 platforms analyzed are as follows:

• Pinterest: 12,38 points
• Quora: 12,96 points
• Twitch: 13,51 points
• LinkedIn: 14,89 points
• Reddit: 15,19 points
• X/Twitter: 17,04 points
• YouTube: 18,52 points
• Instagram: 22,41 points
• TikTok: 23,01 points
• Facebook: 28,72 points

Penalties for violating regulations such as the European GDPR or the US CCPA weigh heavily on the final score: they can deduct up to 10 points. Facebook carries a 9,6-point penalty due to fines and issues with data storage location, relegating it to last place. X/Twitter is second to last in this category, with a 6-point penalty. No other service exceeds a 4,4-point penalty.

The history of data breaches has also been taken into account . Here again, platforms like Facebook fare particularly badly, both in terms of the number of incidents and the volume of information exposed.

"Practical" privacy: what really affects your day-to-day life

Beyond fines and major scandals, what matters most to the average user is what data is collected, how it's used, and what they can configure . Incogni offers a second classification focused solely on practical criteria: data collection on websites and apps, use of content in AI, number of privacy settings, and visibility of personal data to other users.

If we stick with that more "battle-ready" photo, the ranking changes quite a bit:

• Twitch: 5,85 points
• Quora: 7,54 points
• Pinterest: 9,01 points
• LinkedIn: 9,36 points
• Reddit: 9,43 points
• X: 9,68 points
• Instagram: 11,92 points
• YouTube: 12,85 points
• Facebook: 12,94 points
• TikTok: 13,00 points

In this scenario, Twitch takes the lead , while TikTok and Facebook are confirmed as the worst performers in daily use. LinkedIn's strong position is noteworthy, as it's often perceived as a rather "gossipy" network, but technically, it offers a reasonable balance between features and controls… although we'll see its limitations later.

Even so, the ranking clearly shows three stable groups: privacy leaders, an intermediate group, and a lagging pack . To understand what's behind these numbers, we need to look at each category in detail.

Using your content to train artificial intelligence

One of the major recent controversies is the massive use of users' texts, photos, and videos to train AI models. For many people, the idea of ​​their posts being used to feed commercial algorithms without any real benefit is utterly unacceptable, which is why many value tools for deleting chat history.

Of all the networks analyzed, only Twitch states that it does not use user content for AI training purposes . The rest do, or plan to, either for their own internal models or to provide training services to third parties.

Facebook and YouTube are particularly ambitious: they intend to use the data both for their own AI and for systems from external partners . Pinterest, X, Quora, and LinkedIn at least allow you to disable this use from your account settings, which is advisable if you don't want your content to end up in training datasets.

On YouTube, the situation is less clear: there is a partial opt-out option , but only for video creators and only against third-party AI models not owned by Google. In other words, Google retains the right to continue using the content within its own ecosystem.

What data do social networks collect… and for what purpose?

Virtually all social media platforms operate on the same model: targeted advertising pays the bills . To achieve this, they need to build highly detailed user profiles, aggregating data from numerous sources.

The privacy policies analyzed show that Twitch, LinkedIn, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram process even sensitive information for advertising purposes (for example, inferred health data, beliefs, or highly personal preferences). As analyses of WhatsApp metadata show , these processes can reconstruct very intimate patterns.

Only Pinterest openly admits to " selling information " under the terms of California's CCPA. The rest talk about "sharing" data with partners and providers, which in practice also means feeding large advertising networks: LinkedIn, Pinterest, Quora, Twitch, X, and YouTube share data with partners, and Pinterest, Reddit, and Quora even share internal search queries you make within the app itself.

If we break down the volume of data required for advertising, Quora, Reddit, and X require the least amount of information to operate. They are followed by TikTok, LinkedIn, Twitch, Facebook, and Instagram, forming an intermediate group. Interestingly, YouTube and Pinterest are the biggest data hogs in terms of the variety of data linked to ads.

At the mobile app level, Facebook and Instagram top the "greed" ranking: they collect 37 out of 38 possible types of data from the device (identifiers, location, activity, contacts, etc.). It's advisable to review the privacy settings and limit unnecessary permissions. LinkedIn follows with 31 types, and both YouTube and Pinterest with 27.

Privacy settings: quantity, quality, and default

It's not very useful to have privacy options if they're hidden, poorly explained, or disabled by default. The study examines how many settings each platform offers and, above all, whether the most secure options are enabled by default.

Pinterest truly shines here : it strikes the best balance, offering numerous privacy options, collecting minimal data when creating an account, and setting a fairly high level of protection by default . Quora, Reddit, and Twitch follow closely behind, maintaining a similar profile.

Contrary to what one might think, Facebook, YouTube, and LinkedIn fall in the middle, with a reasonable number of settings that allow for considerable adjustment of profile exposure, although fine-tuning them requires time and some knowledge.

On the downside, Instagram, X, and TikTok offer the fewest options and have the worst default settings . In practice, this means that if you don't review anything, your profile will be much more public and your data will circulate more than you'd probably like.

Almost all platforms allow you, with some patience, to minimize the amount of information visible to other users . In this regard, Pinterest, Facebook, and TikTok are the best at limiting public exposure. LinkedIn and X, on the other hand, are the most rigid: their design (intended for open networking) makes it difficult to hide much of your personal data.

Alternative social networks focused on privacy and anonymity

Beyond the major general-purpose platforms, the last decade has seen the emergence of social networks that market themselves as the “anti-Facebook” and prioritize privacy above all else. Some are general-purpose, others niche, and many are experimenting with decentralized models.

It was presented as a possible replacement for Facebook (although visually it's more reminiscent of Tumblr). Its promise is based on not storing IP addresses, allowing fake identities, and completely eliminating advertising . It launched in beta, accessible only by invitation (requiring an email address), and received tens of thousands of applications per hour, demonstrating a hunger for more respectful alternatives.

Snapchat rose to fame as "the app of self-destructing messages." Its original idea was to prevent intimate photos and videos from circulating indefinitely and to make it very difficult for the recipient to take screenshots without the sender knowing. Furthermore, it opted for a less targeted advertising model, drastically reducing the need for user profiling. However, it did experience its own scandal with leaks of hundreds of thousands of images, highlighting that its technical security hadn't yet lived up to its claims.

Confide aimed to take ephemeral messaging a step further, positioning itself as a more secure and encrypted alternative to Snapchat . Its texts are hidden line by line and revealed by swiping, making it extremely difficult to capture full screenshots. It uses end-to-end encryption and emphasizes enterprise privacy, although it forgoes sending images, which limits certain uses.

Among the more radical alternatives is Diaspora* , a decentralized social network based on "pods" or servers that anyone can host. Information doesn't reside in a large corporate data center , but is distributed among nodes controlled by users or collectives, without a traditional business model or advertising. It's free software and doesn't aim to monetize your data: when you delete something, it disappears from the server, instead of being frozen "just in case."

Secret and Whisper both capitalized on anonymity as their main selling point: they allow users to share confessions, rumors, and feelings without revealing their identity . Secret requires a phone number and email address to register (the network does identify you, though other users don't), which has raised concerns among security experts, as well as issues with cyberbullying. Whisper uses human moderators and geolocation to display nearby messages, which adds functionality but reduces true anonymity.

In more professional circles, there's Conspire , a networking platform that analyzes email metadata (sender, recipient, subject) to map connections between people . It promises to respect email content and focus only on the data necessary to build a network of contacts, but by its very nature, it works with extremely sensitive information.

In the more activist sphere, we find n-1 , a platform conceived as a “social network of the people and for the people ,” widely used in social movements like 15M to organize assemblies and protests. It is free, decentralized, and self-managed, prioritizing collective security over aesthetics and seeking to escape the control of large corporations and, as far as possible, institutional surveillance.

Twister brings the P2P (peer-to-peer) concept to the world of microblogging: each user is a node, and content is distributed across the network without a central server . There is no company with the power to censor messages, and the direct messaging system uses end-to-end encryption. It is still in beta, but has received positive reviews for its technical potential.

Finally, Friendica attempts to solve the classic problem of alternative networks: being "alone." It's another decentralized, open-source project, but with a clear mission: to enable interoperability with Facebook, Twitter, Diaspora, and other networks , so you can chat with contacts outside your network without forcing them all to migrate to the same platform. Some related projects are also exploring systems like PureOS to strengthen privacy at the system level.

The future of social privacy: free technology or transparency from the giants?

This entire ecosystem demonstrates that privacy has become a significant added value for both startups and open-source software projects. However, it's important to remember that decentralized networks typically require more technical expertise (managing a server, understanding cryptographic keys, etc.) and that their user base remains very small.

For the average user, accustomed to platforms where “everything is done for you,” this complexity is a real barrier. That's why many experts believe the path forward will be twofold: on the one hand, the gradual growth of open and federated networks ; on the other, regulatory pressure for giants like Meta and Google to be much more transparent and reduce their data exploitation.

Studies also debunk the idea that young people don't care about privacy. In fact, research such as that from the Oxford Internet Institute indicates that younger people configure their privacy settings quite carefully , often more so than previous generations, who were complacent during the era of "everything free in exchange for data."

For marketing professionals, the challenge is clear: to continue leveraging segmentation without resorting to intrusive practices or legal gray areas. The approach gaining traction is one of more limited, clear, and consensual data collection , with particular care taken with especially sensitive information.

Controversial business models: paying with money or with data

A prime example of this tension is Meta's new model with Facebook and Instagram: pay a subscription to avoid personalized advertising or continue for free while accepting intensive tracking. On paper, it sounds like freedom of choice. In practice, it has stirred up a huge legal and media storm in the European Union.

Organizations like BEUC (European Consumer Organisation) have denounced this approach, arguing that it fails to respect the essence of the GDPR: if the alternative to providing your data is a "paywall," consent ceases to be truly free. There is even talk of coerced consent , because many people cannot afford the payment option or do not fully understand the scope of data processing.

A key point of the complaint is the use of "dark patterns" : design and language tricks to push the user toward the most lucrative option for the company. These include large, eye-catching buttons to accept tracking, but hidden or confusingly worded opt-out options; texts that downplay the real impact of the targeting; and unsubscribe processes that are far more convoluted than sign-ups.

Meta has attempted to strike a balance with so-called "less personalized ads ," based on context (what you're doing at that moment) rather than your browsing history. However, technical analyses, such as those by the NGO noyb, indicate that the company continues to collect enormous amounts of metadata even with this approach, maintaining sufficient capacity to profile users by approximate location, device type, connection times, and so on.

Beyond the fine print, there's a fundamental debate: if we accept this model, privacy risks becoming a luxury only accessible to those who can afford it. Activists like Max Schrems succinctly summarize it: fundamental rights shouldn't become a "premium" extra dependent on income level, especially in a context of widespread economic hardship.

Specific risks for brands on social media

It's not just individual users who suffer the consequences of poor privacy management. Brand and corporate accounts are a prime target for cybercriminals, both because of their visibility and the value of their audiences.

Attackers seek to steal confidential information , hijack profiles to scam customers, and launch reputation sabotage campaigns with offensive content or content that contradicts the organization's values. Even small companies with relatively small communities can lose years of work on social media if they lose control of their accounts.

The most common incidents are credential theft, account hijacking, and identity theft through fake profiles. Many brands react late or poorly, partly because they still think that “this only happens to big companies.” But data shows that dozens of companies fall victim every year , and a significant number lack even a basic action plan.

A specific example: the public transport company Urbanos Talavera detected fake profiles circulating that offered unrealistic discounts in exchange for personal and banking information. The company had to issue official statements, report the accounts to the platform and the authorities , and reinforce communication about its legitimate channels.

Another widely exploited vector is LinkedIn , where cybercriminals impersonate executives to recruit SMEs or suppliers. After a supposed service agreement, they send documentation as malicious attachments which, when opened, infect systems and grant remote control over the victim company's infrastructure. In corporate contexts, it's worth asking whether your company can read your chats and what metadata remains accessible.

How to strengthen your brand's privacy and security on social media

If you manage corporate profiles, it's worth taking seriously a small, multi-phase crash plan to minimize risks.

The first step is a social media audit : inventory all official accounts, review who has access, with what passwords, and from which devices. It's crucial to change weak passwords, enable two-factor authentication whenever possible, and revoke old access, especially for people who no longer work at the organization.

At the same time, it's advisable to design an internal security and privacy policy for social media . This guide should clearly define roles (who administers, who publishes, who only monitors), prohibited actions (for example, logging in from public computers), and the protocol to follow in case of any suspected incident: temporary account suspension, urgent revocation of permissions, review of connected apps, and transparent communication with the audience.

Granular permission management is greatly simplified using tools like Hootsuite or Sprout Social, which allow you to assign different access levels to each team member (administrator, editor, read-only, etc.). This makes it easier to audit actions, limit the impact of human error, and revoke access in a matter of minutes.

Equally important is implementing regular monitoring of accounts and brand mentions. Social listening tools like Brand24 help detect fake profiles, phishing campaigns, and suspicious conversations involving your brand name. This monitoring also helps verify compliance with internal policies and identify any excessive permissions.

Special cases: TikTok, Instagram and young users

The TikTok case has an additional geopolitical component: beyond the classic risks of any social network, several governments fear that user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government or that the platform could be used as a propaganda vector.

The parent company, ByteDance, maintains that it no longer shares data with Chinese authorities, but countries like the United States have opted to restrict or completely prohibit access to the app in certain contexts. European Union institutions have also banned its use on official devices for cybersecurity reasons. This has led some large companies, albeit quietly, to reduce their presence or activity on TikTok outside of those countries.

At the same time, Meta has begun rolling out Teen Accounts on Instagram in Europe , which come with a higher level of protection: limited contact, content filters, and visibility restrictions to reduce the risk of scams and harassment. For brands, this means a more controlled environment where it's a bit harder for fake profiles to impersonate official accounts and deceive minors.

It's also worth debunking a common misconception: while there's a tendency to think that older people "don't get it" and young people are the most naive, recent studies indicate that older users are less likely to fall for online scams , partly because they are more naturally wary. Teenagers and young adults, on the other hand, live hyper-connected lives, engaging in many more online activities (social networks, apps, games) and exposing themselves to a greater number of attempted frauds.

Practical steps to protect your personal privacy on social networks

Beyond choosing which platforms you want to be on, there are a good number of concrete actions you can take right now to regain control over your data.

The first step is to review your ad and privacy settings on the social networks you use: disable targeting based on third-party data, delete inferred interests and categories that don't reflect you, and limit the use of your activity outside the platform as much as possible. On Facebook and Twitter, for example, you can disable personalization based on your browsing history on other websites.

Another key measure is to disable location tracking for social media apps and your phone's camera, or restrict it to "only while using." The combination of location history, photo metadata, and real-time activity allows for incredibly precise profiling of your daily routines.

On platforms that allow it, such as Twitter or TikTok, choosing not to log in to consume content also drastically reduces the information that can be directly associated with your identity. At the same time, it's a good idea to review which apps and games you've linked to your Facebook or Google account and revoke any unnecessary or excessive permissions.

As much as possible, get used to ignoring ads within apps themselves , and if something interests you, search for it using a browser with a VPN or at least tracker blocking, or by using Tor Browser on Android . This will prevent each ad click from becoming another tag on your profile.

Taking it a step further involves creating a disposable or dedicated email address for social media , unconnected to your main accounts, and using it as a "separation layer" between your real identity and your online profiles. If possible, also use more privacy-focused email services for these purposes.

And, of course, all of this falls apart without good password hygiene : long passwords (more than 12 characters), unique for each service, a combination of uppercase letters, lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols, and regular changes. A password manager makes this task much easier and reduces the temptation to reuse weak credentials everywhere.

Having considered all these layers—from privacy rankings to business models, including alternative networks, risks to brands, and practical measures—it is clear that there is no perfect social network or total protection , but there is ample room to choose better with whom you share your data, what permissions you grant, and how you configure each platform to work more in your favor than against you.