Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 566 posts

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#321

Post by pkaye »

aleksei wrote: post #262
nullc wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was amused that Elizabeth Warren's campaign site wouldn't display the content for me unless I permitted scripts from google.com (w/ umatrix) since she is promoting breaking up google.

Although you can be pro break-up-Google while using one, or even many, of their services. So I don't really see the amusement.

The belief these days is that when someone does something wrong everyone must shun them and not do business with them. Her website didn't have to use Google services as there are many alternatives.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#322

Post by benreesman »

saagarjha wrote: post #317
benreesman wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

> reeks of sour grapes that a mediocre employee at one of these places makes 3-20x what anyone makes (as a rank and file employee) anywhere else This is not an argument and moreover not even true: there are companies that pay well and don’t collect reams of data on their users.

You didn’t address my argument and unless you’ve been on more comp committees than me then I would annotate that as sources needed.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#323

Post by bad_user »

benreesman wrote: post #314
__jal wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know. I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits mak…

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

How about our friends and family? Should we configure a VPN for them too?

Btw the argument you just made applies to any form of surveillance or censorship. Just because your can still find functional VPN services for China, is China's great firewall OK?

And what happens when web services start blocking VPNs?

Netflix does it quite successfully. And I'm sure Cloudflare could provide such a service for free.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#324

Post by luckylion »

benreesman wrote: post #314
__jal wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know. I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits mak…

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

> Again, you’re not likely part of that group, but seriously who hangs out on HN and can’t configure a VPN?

Recaptcha tracks users / devices, not IPs. A VPN won't help, it'll only lower your score. At that point: not allowing them to track you just means you can't use large parts of the web.

"You don't want that GPS tracker installed into your skull? Well, we won't force you, of course, but public transportation, government services and most grocery stores can only be used by GPS-skull-people"

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#325

Post by behringer »

frenchyatwork wrote: post #179
stri8ed wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it that different from the way Google Analytics works?

It is, in the sense that it's easy to disable Google Analytics by disabling tracking in Firefox, and there's no consequences. If a website uses reCAPTCHA, and you have tracking disabled, the website will break.

Works for me. Assuming one uses something like Privacy Badger and it if it were programmed to block reCaptcha, these websites that require recaptcha will go the way of anti-adblocker popups. People will simply say no and hit the X and go to their competitors.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#326

Post by saagarjha »

benreesman wrote: post #292
smsm42 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the annoying part of it. They try to collect everything about me, down to my favorite color and the brand of tea I am drinking, and they can't even deliver a semi-relevant ad. Best they can do is to bombard me with shoe and riding classes ads for 6 month after I search for "weight of a horseshoe" and stuff like that. They kill the privacy, they make 99% of the sites unusable without an ad blocker, and at the e…

If I were you I’d be more worried that Google de facto controls whatever we’re calling HTTP these days than that they have a BigTable entry that ties a browser you once used to a preference for Earl Grey.

This is a false dichotomy: I don’t see why I can’t be worried about both.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#327

Post by amenod »

benreesman wrote: post #314
__jal wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know. I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits mak…

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

> You could either stop using these services or ...

Are you serious? Have you tried not using their services? Try blocking Google Analytics, Tag Manager, ReCaptcha, fonts, gstatic,... What you will see is that you can no longer access much of the Internet. Want to participate in StackOverflow? Good luck if you block Google.

My beef is not with them trying to find my data when I'm on their site(s). They are however everywhere, on almost every site I visit. Coupled with their (impressive) technical provess it is beyond creepy, and there is simply no way one can avoid them.

I don't know what the solution is or will be, but as far as I'm concerned, this should be illegal.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#328

Post by miccah »

> According to two security researchers who’ve studied reCaptcha, one of the ways that Google determines whether you’re a malicious user or not is whether you already have a Google cookie installed on your browser.

This makes sense to me. The presence of cookies is a strong indicator of normal human browsing, and Google would only be able to see their own cookie.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#329

Post by _Codemonkeyism »

dessant wrote: post #126

Google has been doing the same with reCAPTCHA v2 [1]. They are aware of the legal risk of outright blocking users from accessing services, so reCAPTCHA v3 contains no user facing UI, Google merely makes a suggestion in the form of a user score, so the responsibility to delay or block access and the legal liability that comes with it falls on websites. reCAPTCHA v2 is superseded by v3 because it presents a broader opp…

"reCAPTCHA v2 is superseded by v3 because it presents a broader opportunity for Google to collect data, and do so with reduced legal risk."

And if you use something to prevent tracking - in my case Brave - reCAPTCHA is a huge pain that often takes dozens of clicks to make it through - delayed by Google to wait out bots.

Some times I think reCAPTCHAs main goal is to bring back those opposing tracking back into the fold of Chrome with painful recaptchas.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#330

Post by losteric »

benreesman wrote: post #314
__jal wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know. I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits mak…

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

Most people here can avoid the impact of climate change - do you think we shouldn't talk about that either?

These are societal problems. It's good to care about people beyond yourself, and to talk about the professional ethical responsibilities of software engineers with regards to corporate mass-surveillance.

Post reply on HN