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

Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 195 posts

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#41

Post by dehrmann »

brenden2 wrote: post #12
foota wrote: post #2

This lawsuit is idiotic. They're claiming Google is doing something wrong by tracking users from websites using ad tech when someone uses their browsers private browsing mode.

What Google is doing is wrong. That's literally what the lawsuit is about.

If the issue is on the collection side, what technical mechanism does Google have for identifying incognito traffic? There's already a game of whack-a-mole being played because news sites are detecting if you're in incognito mode, but that's in JS, so the access logs were already collected, and the the hacks for detecting incognito are slowly getting fixed, so it's not a viable solution.

DNT is a header, but it's a preference and not legally binding.

The only thing Google did that was "wrong" is that incognito gave uses the impression that they weren't being tracked externally, when in reality the only thing it does is not save your history and start with no cookies.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#42

Post by brenden2 »

dehrmann wrote: post #41
brenden2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What Google is doing is wrong. That's literally what the lawsuit is about.

If the issue is on the collection side, what technical mechanism does Google have for identifying incognito traffic? There's already a game of whack-a-mole being played because news sites are detecting if you're in incognito mode, but that's in JS, so the access logs were already collected, and the the hacks for detecting incognito are slowly getting fixed, so it's not a viable solution. DNT is a header, but it's a p…

What you're saying only serves to support the argument that the tracking is wrong in the first place, IMO. Google doesn't have a right to follow everyone around the web and flex their muscle just because they can. Since they have a monopoly and nobody is even close to challenging them, someone needs to step in and regulate them.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#43

Post by dr_kiszonka »

(Disclaimer: I have a big personal gripe with Google, but I don't hate the company in general)

Something has been on mind for a while.

I see lawsuits against Google collecting / selling personal data and ideas to combat its monopoly in search. What I don't see is a discussion about regulating companies that have data on the majority of the population.

I know for a fact that Google used search insights to inform strategy. By knowing what people search for and modeling our behavior, they have an unprecedented ability to forecast future events. I expect that Facebook and other, lesser-known companies do the same. I believe it is dangerous for a company to have this ability.

I am not an expert in public policy and politics. Would it make sense to have regulatory oversight over all companies that have data on, e.g., over 50% of a country's population?

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#44

Post by t0mas88 »

oefrha wrote: post #13
t0mas88 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Server logs with IP addresses are acceptable to most European privacy regulators if you only use them for a technical purpose such as debugging. And not keep them longer than needed for that. So practically: logs are fine, delete them after a while. If you store the same information in a permanent database and use it for analysis you're in trouble and should have asked permission. The fact that the user uses a privat…

> The fact that the user uses a private window or other means to indicates they don't want to be tracked probably makes this a more clear case. That’s a very confusing statement. My server logs don’t filter incoming log entries based on user agent, and certainly not on whether you’re using a “private window” or not. In addition, the goal of a private/incognito session is to be indistinguishable from regular sessions,…

But you're not using the IP addresses in the logs to circumvent the fact that cookies are being deleted by your user's device right? Because it looks like that's what Google was doing, and that's actively circumventing the decision of the user not to be tracked which is illegal in many places.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#45

Post by [deleted] »

AlexandrB wrote: post #15
foota wrote: post #2

This lawsuit is idiotic. They're claiming Google is doing something wrong by tracking users from websites using ad tech when someone uses their browsers private browsing mode.

Actually I think it nicely highlights the contradictions inherent in Google's monopolistic position. The user clearly expressed an intent to browse "privately" in one Google product - Chrome. The fact that this doesn't then completely block Google Analytics or forward the preference for privacy to other Google properties is a choice that conveniently aligns with Google's ad business but ignores the intent of what the…

[deleted]

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#46

Post by tantalor »

oefrha wrote: post #13
t0mas88 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Server logs with IP addresses are acceptable to most European privacy regulators if you only use them for a technical purpose such as debugging. And not keep them longer than needed for that. So practically: logs are fine, delete them after a while. If you store the same information in a permanent database and use it for analysis you're in trouble and should have asked permission. The fact that the user uses a privat…

> The fact that the user uses a private window or other means to indicates they don't want to be tracked probably makes this a more clear case. That’s a very confusing statement. My server logs don’t filter incoming log entries based on user agent, and certainly not on whether you’re using a “private window” or not. In addition, the goal of a private/incognito session is to be indistinguishable from regular sessions,…

Detecting when users of any browser are using Incognito mode goes against the spirit of privacy, even if it’s not being done to directly track people as such, and any information that some browsers share and others don’t helps add to a browser’s fingerprint.

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2019/07/22/chrome-76-blocks...

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#47

Post by Chabsff »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #35
Chabsff wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are asking that browsers announce to websites that the user has incognito mode enabled, which immediately opens the door to websites refusing to serve users running incognito mode at all.

I think that's entirely fair: Websites should not track users who do not want to be tracked, but websites should decide whether or not to serve clients which aren't to be tracked.

Well, ideally yes, but let's be honest here. If we can't trust websites to not abuse data, how can we possibly trust them to respect a polite request not to gather the data in the first place? I would personally rather have an incognito mode feature that I have confidence performs the task it claims to do without alerting the website, than one that loudly announces its presence, on the hope that it might be respected.

I don't trust Google, but I certainly don't want Google to trust random websites on my behalf.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#48

Post by riazrizvi »

criddell wrote: post #24
dvduval wrote: post #16

I know that Google is making money through use of my personal data. I wish they would be required boldly state on every page that my personal data is being used, and that they are profiting from it. Finally, there should be some steps offered to remedy some of the above such as requesting that parts of the data that would be convenient for me to have deleted would be deleted. And the parts that are inconvenient such…

Would this work for you: WARNING! We use your personal data to improve your experience using Google products. We believe this will lead you using the service more often and, in doing so, see more ads which we profit from.

... and to help funnel investments into promising web properties giving us an insurmountable competitive edge in search. While we could use this as an unfair advantage in any takeover talk, we have a motto and a friendly logo which clearly signal our benign intentions.

Side note, we are spinning out Google into a separate entity, because we are growing so big. The new conglomerate is called Alphabet. It's just a silly accounting action, nothing to see here.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#49

Post by ErikAugust »

dr_kiszonka wrote: post #43

(Disclaimer: I have a big personal gripe with Google, but I don't hate the company in general) Something has been on mind for a while. I see lawsuits against Google collecting / selling personal data and ideas to combat its monopoly in search. What I don't see is a discussion about regulating companies that have data on the majority of the population. I know for a fact that Google used search insights to inform strat…

"By knowing what people search for and modeling our behavior, they have unprecedented ability to forecast future events. I expect Facebook and other, lesser known companies do the same. I believe it is dangerous for a company to have this ability."

I have thought of this as "search-based front-running". How much of it goes on, I would like to know.

Post reply on HN