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

Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 116 posts

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#21

Post by hericium »

cato_the_elder wrote: post #14
hericium wrote: post #3

HN is flooded by "archive.ph" campaign which injects Russian (and other) tracking scripts to copies of crawled 3rd party sites and requires JS to load on Firefox/Linux (and some other browsers) while pretending to be "archiving".

It does do archiving, and it does it very well. It's fast, provides short URLs, blocks ads in the archived pages, tries to bypass paywalls and login walls, and resists censorship. That's why people use it. And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts, just like a good chunk of the internet. If you are privacy-conscious (or just don't like ads), then you can use uBlock Origin to get rid of them.

Why would I want to go to JS-infested copy of a site which original version does not _require_ JS? Advice to do so and use uBlock to block something that wouldn't be run on original site is ridiculous.

If you guys do archiving, stop spamming HN with links that are fresh and don't need archiving, just to run your tracking on victims' devices for profit. How is it not just stealing content from other sites?

> It's fast, provides short URLs, blocks ads

> And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts

So which one is it...?

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#22

Post by Nextgrid »

balderdash wrote: post #9
pessimizer wrote: post #8

Is this really a complaint that a single, well-established Russian ad company got the same information from Google that they would give to any US company with an email address? This is part of the cognitive dissonance that insists that Russia has the most effective intelligence services in the world, that can manipulate elections at will and subsume every US social movement to spread its propaganda, but is too stupid…

So your argument is that companies and people should not follow the law or do what’s right because people can circumvent their efforts?! “Why’d you sell vodka to that 12 year old? Ahh well it’s trivial for them to go out and get a fake ID…so I don’t bother checking ID”

Maybe his argument is that spyware should be illegal, regardless of whether the operator is US or Russia.

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#23

Post by tjpnz »

downrightmike wrote: post #16

This is why I have a 3.7m entry dns block list, and a few other things. EFF ads.

I do too and it literally saved me not an hour ago. Why does Google publish guidelines on what is and isn't acceptable on their ad network when they don't fucking enforce any of them? They might not be distributing malware directly, but they're (IMV knowingly) allowing it to continue.

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#25

Post by apstls »

BrainVirus wrote: post #18

The sad thing about news like this is that most people only pay attention at all because they've been bombarded with anti-Russian propaganda, not because this showcases Google's awful anti-privacy practices. Despite years of warnings, examples and analysis of where this can lead, the only thing that matters in the end is some emotional trigger word that makes the public think they are dealing with an "outgroup". The…

Accurate reporting of Russia's cyber activities is not propaganda.

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#26

Post by cronix »

hericium wrote: post #21
cato_the_elder wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does do archiving, and it does it very well. It's fast, provides short URLs, blocks ads in the archived pages, tries to bypass paywalls and login walls, and resists censorship. That's why people use it. And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts, just like a good chunk of the internet. If you are privacy-conscious (or just don't like ads), then you can use uBlock Origin to get rid of them.

Why would I want to go to JS-infested copy of a site which original version does not _require_ JS? Advice to do so and use uBlock to block something that wouldn't be run on original site is ridiculous. If you guys do archiving, stop spamming HN with links that are fresh and don't need archiving, just to run your tracking on victims' devices for profit. How is it not just stealing content from other sites? > It's fast…

Neither. It bypasses paywalls and opens the discussion up to everyone, which is the main reason why it's used on HN, or the discussion on each article would only be between the (relatively few) subscribers of that particular site and those who haven't used up the "3 free views for this month" quota.

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#27

Post by ClumsyPilot »

pessimizer wrote: post #8

Is this really a complaint that a single, well-established Russian ad company got the same information from Google that they would give to any US company with an email address? This is part of the cognitive dissonance that insists that Russia has the most effective intelligence services in the world, that can manipulate elections at will and subsume every US social movement to spread its propaganda, but is too stupid…

Indeed, I am thinking what will stop Google selling data to a shell company registered in Cayman islands with unknown beneficiaries.

this is just so easy, we have noone to blame but ourselves

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#28

Post by LordDragonfang »

hericium wrote: post #21
cato_the_elder wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does do archiving, and it does it very well. It's fast, provides short URLs, blocks ads in the archived pages, tries to bypass paywalls and login walls, and resists censorship. That's why people use it. And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts, just like a good chunk of the internet. If you are privacy-conscious (or just don't like ads), then you can use uBlock Origin to get rid of them.

Why would I want to go to JS-infested copy of a site which original version does not _require_ JS? Advice to do so and use uBlock to block something that wouldn't be run on original site is ridiculous. If you guys do archiving, stop spamming HN with links that are fresh and don't need archiving, just to run your tracking on victims' devices for profit. How is it not just stealing content from other sites? > It's fast…

Archive links get posted in the comments to bypass paywalls and make sure the OP is available if the site gets hugged to death. It's not some conspiracy. Also, I usually see it used for sites that are absolutely bloated with javascript, so I don't know what you're stalking about there.

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#29

Post by 1shooner »

BrainVirus wrote: post #18

The sad thing about news like this is that most people only pay attention at all because they've been bombarded with anti-Russian propaganda, not because this showcases Google's awful anti-privacy practices. Despite years of warnings, examples and analysis of where this can lead, the only thing that matters in the end is some emotional trigger word that makes the public think they are dealing with an "outgroup". The…

>some emotional trigger word that makes the public think they are dealing with an "outgroup".

What specifically are you referring to?

Re: Google allowed a sanctioned Russian ad company to harvest user data for months

#30

Post by cato_the_elder »

hericium wrote: post #21
cato_the_elder wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does do archiving, and it does it very well. It's fast, provides short URLs, blocks ads in the archived pages, tries to bypass paywalls and login walls, and resists censorship. That's why people use it. And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts, just like a good chunk of the internet. If you are privacy-conscious (or just don't like ads), then you can use uBlock Origin to get rid of them.

Why would I want to go to JS-infested copy of a site which original version does not _require_ JS? Advice to do so and use uBlock to block something that wouldn't be run on original site is ridiculous. If you guys do archiving, stop spamming HN with links that are fresh and don't need archiving, just to run your tracking on victims' devices for profit. How is it not just stealing content from other sites? > It's fast…

> If you guys do archiving

It's not my website. Also, people who run it (almost certainly) owe us nothing.

> So which one is it...?

Try fetching a URL on both Internet Archive [1] and archive.today, and you'll know what I mean.

[1]: https://web.archive.org/

Post reply on HN