Live data from Hacker News

Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

fugitivus.wordpress.com

271–280 of 287 posts

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#271
post #264
post #255

Well, Google followed up on it and she wrote another post about that. http://fugitivus.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/screw-you-google/

> This blog is protected, to view it you must log in. I have a Wordpress account, but it doesn't seem to bring down the wall for me. Can you please quote an excerpt?

Huh. Sorry, I can't access it now either.

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#272
post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? Buzz exposes your up-till-now private email contacts by listing them on your public profile page, unless you take the time and effort to understand that it's doing so and follow the convoluted opt-out process. That's why everyone's upset.

Where does my contact list appear on my profile page? I can't find it. I can find my followers, but they aren't the same as my contacts.

By default, your followers were auto-populated from your contact list, potentially revealing who you most email.

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#273
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what the problem is either. I also have complete control over my privacy settings, but it seems you can't say that in this particular topic because the army of group-thinkers will down-vote you (read: censor your comment) to oblivion. We can't have two-sided conversations in HN anymore. Either you bash Buzz/Google or get the hell out of this thread.

Here is where I think the problem lies. First, Google doesn't show your contact list. It doesn't. This was what people were suggesting, and it's not true. Basically, what is happening is the same thing that happens at twitter by default. People follow other people, and followers, NOT contacts, are shared. People can see who is following you, but they can't see your contacts. So, when someone joins Buzz, Google sugges…

I did some of my own experiments with a couple of throwaway accounts, before the privacy improvements on Thursday.

I set up a profile on one account ahead of time. This was very easy to do; Google Reader encourages it at various places.

When I logged into GMail and got the "Buzz" welcome screen, it offered "Try Buzz" and "No thanks." I clicked "No thanks" and it took me to GMail, but the Buzz UI was enabled anyways. When I logged into second account that was a contact of the first, it received a notification that the first account was following the second, with a link to the first account's profile and list of followees/followers.

Now, this part is a bit foreign to many people, but imagine that the fact you email someone is a secret and potentially damaging to you. Maybe you are a whistleblower talking to a government regulator. Someone I know had a stalker added to their Buzz followers along with people she didn't want the stalker to learn about (because stalkers will try to get at their victims through their friends and family). Maybe you don't want certain people aware of your sexual orientation, or your religious or political activities.

At this point, the damage is already done. Before Thursday night, there was no clear notification or way to opt-out of the public followers list until after it had been created and then broadcast to a list of people. By the time you got around to checking out Buzz, realizing that your information had been disclosed, and figuring out how to remove it, it could easily be too late. Note that Google did not "suggest" people to follow and then let users "accept" these defaults. They were added without the user's knowledge or consent.

Worse, if you found the "Turn off Buzz" link in the GMail footer and clicked it before blocking your followers, changing your profile settings, etc., then all your information is still public but hidden from your GMail pages! It's then much harder either to discover the problem or to fix it.

And Google has admitted to some outright bugs that made the situation worse for the "Fuck you Google" blogger. For example, people still appeared in the "Following you" list on Google Reader even after they were blocked and you set your Reader shared items to private; they couldn't actually see your shared items then but it appeared to the user that they could. Also, before Thursday there was no way to block a user who did not have a public profile.

My friends who work at Google are convinced these are real problems[1]. I think you are dismissing them way too quickly.

[1]: http://www.google.com/buzz/mbrubeck/HEN2DyJooNZ/This-looks-l...

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#274
post #173

If you have concerns over privacy, move your data somewhere that doesn't obviously look into your private data for the purposes of advertising. Stay anonymous. Use your ISP's email. Use accounts you pay for and can hold accountable for transgressions like this. You give your data freely to google without understanding the terms of that transaction and they will use those rights in some way you arn't happy with. She s…

"Stay anonymous. Use your ISP's email" You ISP is the least anonymous email provider available. They know exactly who you are, where you live, and can see everything you do online.

I may be wrong, but I think that the parent of your post had a more limited idea of 'anonymous' here.

Your ISP knows all the things you say they do, but so far as I know, no ISP does the kind of social/networking stuff with your information that Facebook, Yahoo, Google and company do. A government agency can get information from your ISP, but your ISP doesn't "share" anything through default-to-yes things like Buzz. (I may be wrong about this. Some ISPs may do this too.)

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#275
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"web-based anonymous e-mail" can't exist. It is just too tempting for the hosting company to use your personal data without your explicit consent.

"not being raped" can't exist. It is just too tempting for men to rape you without your explicit consent.

This is kind of beating a dead horse here, but Despammed.com was my baby (still is, in an embalmed and pathetic sense) for six years. And we had Web-based anonymous email for real, written into our policy. We tossed the logs every day - the only way anybody could get fresh logs, before tossing, was to subpoena us for them. One - exactly one - law enforcement agency did that, for a user who was using us as a dropbox for credit card fraud. The Italians never managed to get us a subpoena for the freedom-of-speech abrogation they attempted. And nobody else ever tried. They'd bluster a bit, but when it came to getting us paperwork, they went away.

I should probably reinvigorate that someday.

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're probably right but what would make them think this would be a tiny minority? Have these engineers never had ex-girlfriends?

Sane people don't have excessive drama with their exes.

Sane people don't make accounts to troll anti-google posts. And who said anything about excessive drama: do I really need to list the myriad reasons why one wouldn't want email to automatically "follow" exes and vice versa?

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sane people don't have excessive drama with their exes.

Sane people don't make accounts to troll anti-google posts. And who said anything about excessive drama: do I really need to list the myriad reasons why one wouldn't want email to automatically "follow" exes and vice versa?

Clearly this is an edge case though; you cant protect against every eventuality!

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She willingly included Google in that relationship by making him a contact and giving Google information that they had a relationship. You can't give away information and expect it not to be acted upon. Corporations are not bound by anything except for the law and the contract they form with you. If it's within their rights, they can and will act upon it.

It sounds like there are two issues here. First, that Google assumed that because they were 'frequent contacts' that they were best friends, and thus him and all his jackass friends were made followers on her Google Reader. The second is that all the people that frequently contact HER (via an anonymous account which forwards to her Google account) now have her personal Gmail account and are following her on Buzz (and…

She must have replied fairly regularly to these individuals; I get around 10 emails a week from one individual to whom I have replied around once a month - and they never got auto-added.

Re: Automatically followed by abusive ex-husband (and his friends) on Google Buzz

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is where I think the problem lies. First, Google doesn't show your contact list. It doesn't. This was what people were suggesting, and it's not true. Basically, what is happening is the same thing that happens at twitter by default. People follow other people, and followers, NOT contacts, are shared. People can see who is following you, but they can't see your contacts. So, when someone joins Buzz, Google sugges…

I did some of my own experiments with a couple of throwaway accounts, before the privacy improvements on Thursday. I set up a profile on one account ahead of time. This was very easy to do; Google Reader encourages it at various places. When I logged into GMail and got the "Buzz" welcome screen, it offered "Try Buzz" and "No thanks." I clicked "No thanks" and it took me to GMail, but the Buzz UI was enabled anyways.…

Couple things here.

First, I stand by what I said: People need to be aware, and made aware, of these things. Privacy is your business, and putting my privacy in the hands of someone else (and I'm not even referring to Google here) means I'm essentially giving up my privacy. Whistleblowers and other people who wished to remain secret should have taken more steps to ensure their privacy (accounts that can't be traced back to themselves).

Secondly, you don't make it clear whether either account said it auto-followed things before you logged in or not. Did it? Did Account 1 follow Account 2 without actually logging in with Buzz enabled, or was it only after logging in it auto-followed? Note: I realize the implications of either way; however, I'm just curious to know which it is for my own knowledge. Again, I'd rather not assume. You also make it seem as if you accepted the default privacy settngs Google set for you.

Next, I realize their were bugs in Reader that "Fuck you Google" made them aware of. Bugs happen. In this case, the bug was just a display bug and from my understanding, didn't actually share anything. In this case, the big problem was merely a display problem. Sure, this is a bug, and a serious one, but not the extent that anyone was suggesting.

Finally, everything I've seen from Google, including the link you sent, suggests that they had these settings in before hand, and that the privacy concerns were more from people that didn't look into the privacy settings before hand and accepted the defaults. The link you posted even described all the issues you described by fixing them merely through making them more visible.

So again, we come to it: The settings were made available. That they weren't flashing and in front of the users with big bold text with sound announcing themselves is a problem, but not to the same extent that "Google was display user's contact lists on their profile page."

However, that all being said, I still think we can learn a lot by this. But looking at it through the eyes of the mob-think that occurred these past few days won't teach us anything, and if anything, only promotes continued ignorance of privacy concerns on the internet.

Post reply on HN