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

Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

gpdp.it

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 614 posts

Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

#321

Post by tensor »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #40
ryanmcbride wrote: post #26

I've been using clicky on a few of my sites and even though they _assure_ me that it's totally compliant with gdpr I don't really believe them, does anyone have a decent alternative for analytics that respects people's privacy? I just want to see when I get new vs returning visitors on a page. Cloudflare's analytics are okay but I like how granular clicky can get, but if there's no good way to do that I think I'm jus…

matomo is something you can self host

Note that you must make sure that your host is not in the US as well.

Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

#323

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

corywatilo wrote: post #18

Italy is the 4th in a string of recent decisions across the EU. (We're tracking these cases on isgoogleanalyticsillegal.com along with details for each.) Note that it's not illegal to use GA entirely, just illegal to use in its default state which transmits PII to the US.

Here are the URLs for those who disable Javascript (from https://github.com/PostHog/isgoogleanalyticsillegal.com)

https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=DSB_(Austria_-_2021-0.586...

https://www.cnil.fr/en/use-google-analytics-and-data-transfe...

https://www.gpdp.it/web/guest/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/d...

https://noyb.eu/en/austrian-dsb-eu-us-data-transfers-google-...

NOYB is the primary source tracking these cases and generally was also responsible for filing the complaints that led to them. All the details are available from NOYB's GDPRhub wiki, https://gdprhub.eu. GDPRhub attempts to provide information on all the European DPAs including how to file complaints. At the least it provides contact info for all the DPAs and English translations of DPA decisions.

As stated in 13 Jan 2022 announcement on noyb.eu, these decisions are generally the result of the "Max Schrems II" decision. After that decision, Schrems filed 101 complaints to DPAs, and now the chickens are coming home to roost.

Note that the "legality" of Google Fonts, under the default configuration, is also in question. Arguably use of Google Fonts is even more widespread than use of Google Analytics.

Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

#324

Post by xboxnolifes »

wvenable wrote: post #272
reaperducer wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not illegal to give things away for free unless it's dumping. Which is exactly my point. "[Dumping] occurs when manufacturers export a product... at a price below the normal price with an injuring effect. The objective of dumping is to increase market share in... by driving out competition and thereby create a monopoly situation" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy) That's exactly what's happen…

> Google prices Analytics at $0 to prevent any competition from starting up. It's not dumping because, in the absence of any competition, the price hasn't changed. It just turns out the market price for this service is $0.

> It just turns out the market price for this service is $0

You can't come to this conclusion until you prevent Google from using the acquired data to improve their ad service.

Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

#325

Post by clairity »

ta_5628952 wrote: post #275
clairity wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i mean, that's like asking how is it possible to compartmentalize anything. as elaborated elsewhere, it isn't about literally separating all interests, just those that harm the public. it's about removing the negative externalies that companies like google impose on us via such government contracts.

> just those that harm the public But it’s not that simple. What harms the public? Many would argue being able to use data google collects (legally through subpoenas or grey-legally through any of the number reports that have come out since Snowden) helps government agencies by increasing public security—thus the opposite of harm. Being

in that case, it's pretty simple. the snowden leaks elucidated the government's desire to create a surveillance state with the help of corporations, not that a surveillance state would be a net-good for society.

Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

#328

Post by jeroenhd »

sylware wrote: post #277

I don't understand. They can host locally the data and remotely query it. What's important is the "intelligence" the data does provide: giving critical and unfair advantage for those who have the whole data. For instance, microsoft has an unfair advantage almost anywhere because they have access to the whole linkedin database.

European companies are not allowed to share PII with American companies. That goes for companies with a headquarters in the USA or subsidiaries that may be forced to share data thanks to laws like the US Cloud Act.

Previously, the EU exempted the USA through an "adequacy decision". That was later deemed illegal under EU law as American laws could not guarantee the privacy of EU citizens to the extend the GDPR prescribes. Then the EU tried again, and again such a decision was also overturned in court. The EU is working on another attempt at letting the USA track PII of EU users, but until they do that again (probably for another few years) it's illegal to share PII with American companies in almost all situations.

This is the third time a data processing agency has declared the use of Google Analytics illegal so it shouldn't really come as a surprise to those following tech news.

What's important is that the data is PII and that it's going to a place that can't guarantee privacy to an acceptable standard. Business advantage is irrelevant. The intelligence the data provides is also irrelevant. European privacy laws serve people, not businesses.

Re: Italian watchdog bans use of Google Analytics

#329

Post by tildef »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #288
the_other wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slowing the flow of money out of the public purse and into a very small number of barely accountable global megacorps and private equity funds, whilst improving the employment prospects of the local population, sounds like it's worth the cost of repeat work. Also, nature loves a bit of redundancy. And capitalism loves competition. You can't have competition under a monopoly.

> . And capitalism loves competition. You can't have competition under a monopoly. And the govt. is the biggest monopoly of all. Somehow, restrictions against US firms are praised but if US imposes restrictions that is condemned (e.g. TikTok).

> Somehow, restrictions against US firms are praised

By whom?

> if US imposes restrictions that is condemned (e.g. TikTok).

By whom?

Post reply on HN