OK Google, how much of my life do you observe and disturb? Google would like netizens to believe that the vast multinational has bolstered "privacy" controls on its services today. But you'd be wrong to swallow that line. In fact, no changes have been made to the company's data-slurping and scraping policies. Instead – in a move reflecting Facebook's somewhat disingenuous claims to …
At Google, we value your privacy and sell your information at our discretion. As always, you have no privacy, we will do anything we want with your information and you can and will never ever know what we do with it as each user's information is worth between $3 and $5. Our campaign contributions to all political parties in most developed countries insure that this policy will continue. Thank you.
"At Google, we ... sell your information at our discretion."
No, they don't. In fact they don't sell your information at all.
What they do is use your information *themselves* to allow advertisers to target their ads.
It may still not be acceptable to you (fair enough) but at least be honest about what they do so readers of your misleading comment can make an informed decision on who to trust.
"At Google, we ... sell your information at our discretion."
No, they don't. In fact they don't sell your information at all.
Actually, they do sell it.
Do you know you can get a Master's Degree in List Analysis? By mathematical analysis a company decides how to best use the information collected, for advertising, selling, and what info to sell. Believe me, Google does sell personal information, they go through brokers like everyone else because brokers isolate these companies from the public. One day Google or a company like them will have their Edward Snowden leak how they use the information they collect.
I'm wondering if it's possible they don't sell it, per se but rather fit who they stuff the ads to based on the advertisers needs? IOW, Google sells the audience (but not the data), the advertiser has little to do in the way of analytics except to specify the target market.
If you're going to write an article, at least give it some content. This one looks like just another excuse for some Google bashing.
The points have been made long ago, everybody knows Google uses your private data for ads.
And if you're going to write a short article, it should be possible not to contradict yourself in 10 lines:
"In fact, no changes have been made to the company's data-slurping and scraping policies."
versus
"...which simply builds on the firm's strategy to more closely follow its users around the web."
bringing them together doesn't make them follow more closely, they do that enough already.
So how do they use my WiFi passwords for ads?
Unless I missed an episode, Google knows nothing about your WiFi passwords. You might be confusing with the StreetView WiFi slurp, which consisted in Google recording transmissions from unprotected WiFi (i.e. without password).
"Unless I missed an episode, Google knows nothing about your WiFi passwords."
You missed an episode.
Android phones have an option to backup data - including such things as WiFi passwords - to a Google server, ostensibly so that it can be restored either to the same phone in the event of a reset, or to another phone if it's replaced.
I'm not for one moment suggesting Google access and use that data - because I simply don't know. What I do know is that the first thing I do with a phone or tablet is unset that option; IIRC it's set by default.
But the point is that the data is, for many people, stored on Google's servers, so the possibility is there.
"Android phones have an option to backup data"
Yep, and that there is not even an option to encrypt this data before giving it to Google says it all.
How hard would it be provide local encryption? What backup/archiving tool on the PC for example doesn't provide an encryption option?
The only reason I can see is that Google wants to be able to trawl through *all* the data on your Android device and so they probably do.
I tried to find some assurance about what they do with this backup data in their privacy policies but it is all just vague drivel. Not that I would believe anything they say anyway.
"So how do they use my WiFi passwords for ads?"
Off the top of my head: Your WiFi password is associated with the WiFi network the password is for. The network is identified by the SSID (name of the network) and the BSSID (MAC address). The first 3 octets of the MAC address identify the manufacturer of your router.
Google know how long you've been using that router, can determine if you're happy with said manufacturer and advertise a competitors router or a newer router from the same manufacturer accordingly.
Disclaimer: not saying they do this, but with the data required to store a WiFi password, they could.
"The points have been made long ago, everybody knows Google uses your private data for ads."
If were an advertiser, I would want my money back.... I really can't remember the last time Google showed me an ad I was interested in seeing. Unless I have already booked a flight, and then get flooded with ads regarding travel I couldn't use in two years of travel. And being on the underpaid IT professional list, I look for deals...
I don't think that protects you much. Unless you reject all cookies from Google, and possibly unless you use some kind of anonymising service to change your IP, Google will still have a profile on you.
The only difference is that instead of being about user xyz@gmail.com, it will be about "the user with ID cookie 12345", or possibly about "the user from IP address 123.456.789"
In fact, you don't even need to be using a Google service, have a Google account, or be using the Google Chrome browser. Many browsers today implement a "safe browsing" feature where they use remote metrics to figure out whether a site is a malware site prior to visiting it. Guess whose checking service those browsers send their usage data to?
I did some testing and we verified that Google is using built-in browser "safe browsing" features in Firefox for user fingerprinting.
I have some software that allows me to whitelist sites in my classroom ie students can only get to www.xyz.com and complete the exercise. Great idea in theory but there is so much c**p coming from all over the web, in practice it is useless as it loads qwerty.js from google, farnarkle.js from yahoo, nooo.js from adobe etc etc etc that I need to go to the site, view source & whitelist the calls - its a PITA
The Google announcement contains some interesting lines which reveal an alternate universe.
"people think it’s important to control access to their personal information"
Access my personal information? I don't "access" my personal information. I have it. If they (or anybody) has it, then it's not personal.
"When you trust your personal information with us, you should expect powerful controls that keep it safe and private"
I do. But not by Google's inverse definition of private. It goes on and on, but the bottom line is that Google keeps a profile on its users which is comprehensive and they make the assumption that it is OK for them to do so. But it isn't.
Any information entered on any page or form electronic or otherwise for the engagement of services, required to accesses services, purchase of a goods or tangible assets through or facilitated by your organization may only be used for administrative purposes as defined by commonly accepted account principles and for the delivery of the said services, goods or assets. It may not be disseminated, distributed or disclosed to any party or used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of the person the information was entered by. Consent must be in the form of a written document delivered to your CEO by registered mail the costs of which are paid in full by Google, its agents, assigns, designates or affiliates. This supersedes any permissions implied or assumed that your organization feels it may have been given because a web page, e/mail, service or other electronic documents from your organization were or may be in the future accessed directly or indirectly.
It would appear that issues of privacy are much like insurance contracts in Joe Public's mind : you never understand how important it is until you need it.
I really would like the general public to be a bit more aware of the possible pitfalls of leaving all the details of your life in the hands of a third party which has next to no legal obligation to even listen to your opinion on the use of that data, but, as in everything IT, it would seem that millions of people will have to be bitten hard before any actual measures will be enforced.
In the meantime, I will be avoiding or blocking any and all source of information-gathering that I possibly can.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
