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

Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

sparktoro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 312 posts

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#21

Post by y42 »

bdlowery wrote: post #19
precompute wrote: post #16

> My anonymous source claimed that way back in 2005, Google wanted the full clickstream of billions of Internet users, and with Chrome, they’ve now got it. The API documents suggest Google calculates several types of metrics that can be called using Chrome views related to both individual pages and entire domains. What answer do the engineers at google working on this have for this violation of privacy?

How is it a violation of privacy. Did you read the terms of service?

A tos announcement is not an explicit consent. I doubt that this will help in court, even pre-GDPR.

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#22

Post by precompute »

bdlowery wrote: post #19
precompute wrote: post #16

> My anonymous source claimed that way back in 2005, Google wanted the full clickstream of billions of Internet users, and with Chrome, they’ve now got it. The API documents suggest Google calculates several types of metrics that can be called using Chrome views related to both individual pages and entire domains. What answer do the engineers at google working on this have for this violation of privacy?

How is it a violation of privacy. Did you read the terms of service?

It's a privacy violation regardless of the ToS.

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#23

Post by txomon »

usui wrote: post #4

> Prior to the email and call, I had neither met nor heard of the person who emailed me about this leak. They asked that their identity remain veiled And yet the journalist included a screenshot with one of the weakest blurs I've ever seen... Why would you not excise the person's video portion completely? What good does it serve to have it included in the story? Even if that portion is faked, why would you offer pote…

To make it worse, he made clear when the call had happened, and you have: 1) Who was in the call 2) When the call happened 3) A blur instead of a complete black out

I'm not sure I would feel safe reporting stuff to journalists nowadays.

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#24

Post by ralfn »

Terr_ wrote: post #17
ec109685 wrote: post #8

If anyone is surprised about chrome sending urls to Google, you can turn the “feature” off by unchecking “Make searches and browsing better” in the sync section of Google chrome settings. Creepy.

"But what if I don't want my own computer to build and share a detailed profile of everyone I know, everywhere I go, all my preferences, and how to manipulate me?" "Well obviously it's your fault for not picking the 'Don't Be Cool' option on subpage 27b-6, duh !"

Yeah. It's victim blaming. Reminds me of "they should have shouted louder".

The confusing thing is the crime itself is small on an individual level. The question is: does it add up cumulatively if a small crime is committed against many?

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#25

Post by roastedpeacock »

usui wrote: post #4

> Prior to the email and call, I had neither met nor heard of the person who emailed me about this leak. They asked that their identity remain veiled And yet the journalist included a screenshot with one of the weakest blurs I've ever seen... Why would you not excise the person's video portion completely? What good does it serve to have it included in the story? Even if that portion is faked, why would you offer pote…

That also struck me as odd. And seemingly a violation of journalistic best-practices of protecting sources. I sure hope this was done with consent of the anonymous source.

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#26

Post by 4gotunameagain »

jasonsb wrote: post #13
JSDevOps wrote: post #12

Seriously considering switching back to Firefox after all these years.

What's stopping you? I use both browsers and I see no reason why someone would pick Chrome over Firefox at this point in time.

While the reasons someone would pick Firefox:

  - Privacy
  - Tree style tabs

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#27

Post by danpalmer »

precompute wrote: post #16

> My anonymous source claimed that way back in 2005, Google wanted the full clickstream of billions of Internet users, and with Chrome, they’ve now got it. The API documents suggest Google calculates several types of metrics that can be called using Chrome views related to both individual pages and entire domains. What answer do the engineers at google working on this have for this violation of privacy?

Personal (not work related opinion): This basically can’t happen with things like DMA and GDPR. DMA in particular means you can’t share data across “products” without explicit consent. So you could for example collect websites that don’t work for the purposes of improving Chrome, but not then share that with the Ads/Search orgs for personalisation or targeting, as far as I understand the legislation.

Personal opinion about work at Google (still not googles opinion) I’m consistently impressed with how seriously this stuff is taken and the amount of work that goes into making sure that things like this sharing can’t happen accidentally, and that user choice is respected. The engineers on the ground are absolutely making sure this all works, and most of us care deeply about user privacy. I have personally worked both on implementing new features that significantly push forward privacy, and on implementing privacy controls for regulatory purposes.

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#28

Post by BrenBarn »

danpalmer wrote: post #27
precompute wrote: post #16

> My anonymous source claimed that way back in 2005, Google wanted the full clickstream of billions of Internet users, and with Chrome, they’ve now got it. The API documents suggest Google calculates several types of metrics that can be called using Chrome views related to both individual pages and entire domains. What answer do the engineers at google working on this have for this violation of privacy?

Personal (not work related opinion): This basically can’t happen with things like DMA and GDPR. DMA in particular means you can’t share data across “products” without explicit consent. So you could for example collect websites that don’t work for the purposes of improving Chrome, but not then share that with the Ads/Search orgs for personalisation or targeting, as far as I understand the legislation. Personal opinion…

The thing is that preventing "sharing" isn't sufficient. People who are concerned about privacy don't want any such data collected or stored in the first place, ever. The implicit "sharing" of my data with Google (or whatever company) is a problem in itself. Regardless of how "seriously" Google (or whatever company) takes it, for a lot of the data I don't want them to ever have it in the first place.

Re: Anonymous Source Shared Leaked Google Search API Documents

#29

Post by HelloNurse »

y42 wrote: post #21
bdlowery wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it a violation of privacy. Did you read the terms of service?

A tos announcement is not an explicit consent. I doubt that this will help in court, even pre-GDPR.

Further, a TOS announcement can be easily construed as an admission of intent to fuck users.
Post reply on HN