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

Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 89 posts

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#61

Post by coddle-hark »

defnotashton2 wrote: post #46
tjoff wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the outcome of the A/B matter? The writing is on the wall. Maybe get out now rather than waiting for the frog to get cooked.

Is the another non chromium browser that can handle more than 5 extensions? Ff extension management is terrible which i find unusable in an age where I need extensions to prevent sites from removing usability features like select, copy, and paste. I'm using brave but I don't fully understand how it's related to chromium and if it's a true fork that they are going to be able to maintain independently. I have many many…

This is about gmail, not chromium, but nevertheless: If you’re not willing to adapt your workflow to something other than chromium, maybe you don’t value your privacy as much as you think you do.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#62

Post by jeffbee »

TooCreative wrote: post #60

I can reproduce it on gmail.com Google seems to hide this via Javascript. To reproduce in Chromium: Enable dev tools, enable "Preserve log", go to settings and enable "Auto-open DevTools for popups". Then click on a link in a mail. Now you can see under the Network tab, that the new window did not go to the link you clicked but to a Google redirect url. I guess Google outputs a normal link in the html but then interc…

Google has been rewriting the click target in gmail's web presentation for years. That is not the same, or even related, to changing the URL in the email itself (as presented by SMTP or IMAP).

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#63

Post by oefrha »

TooCreative wrote: post #60

I can reproduce it on gmail.com Google seems to hide this via Javascript. To reproduce in Chromium: Enable dev tools, enable "Preserve log", go to settings and enable "Auto-open DevTools for popups". Then click on a link in a mail. Now you can see under the Network tab, that the new window did not go to the link you clicked but to a Google redirect url. I guess Google outputs a normal link in the html but then interc…

> Google seems to hide this via Javascript.

I'm like 200% sure Google can't "hide this via JavaScript" (whatever "this" means) in my native mail client if they have actually rewritten the URLs, which is the accusation here.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#64

Post by TooCreative »

oefrha wrote: post #63
TooCreative wrote: post #60

I can reproduce it on gmail.com Google seems to hide this via Javascript. To reproduce in Chromium: Enable dev tools, enable "Preserve log", go to settings and enable "Auto-open DevTools for popups". Then click on a link in a mail. Now you can see under the Network tab, that the new window did not go to the link you clicked but to a Google redirect url. I guess Google outputs a normal link in the html but then interc…

> Google seems to hide this via Javascript. I'm like 200% sure Google can't "hide this via JavaScript" (whatever "this" means) in my native mail client if they have actually rewritten the URLs, which is the accusation here.

That is why I said "on gmail.com" which is Googles web interface. I don't use a local mail software.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#65

Post by megous »

jollofricepeas wrote: post #30
oefrha wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, you have a history of making wild accusations like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21109530

Agreed. His “evidence” means nothing and his background is very shady. Those screenshots could be completely made up. Can someone else verify with raw data?

Screenshots are not completely made up. At least the `usg` HMAC seems to be valid, and timestamps are recent enough, so the redirector URLs are legit. Of course it's possible to generate the valid redirector URLs in other ways.

So if this is a scam it's not a completely stupid scam.

Anyway, A/B testing or gradual deoployment is a thing. I'll not turn against a fellow hacker and call him shady, just because a potential A/B gaslighing practice from some megacorp. ;) I'll just wait.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#66

Post by defnotashton2 »

coddle-hark wrote: post #61
defnotashton2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the another non chromium browser that can handle more than 5 extensions? Ff extension management is terrible which i find unusable in an age where I need extensions to prevent sites from removing usability features like select, copy, and paste. I'm using brave but I don't fully understand how it's related to chromium and if it's a true fork that they are going to be able to maintain independently. I have many many…

This is about gmail, not chromium, but nevertheless: If you’re not willing to adapt your workflow to something other than chromium, maybe you don’t value your privacy as much as you think you do.

Correct I value basic usability (the ability to use many plug-ins in this case) over privacy. This is why I don't use proton, cause I can't actually get anything done with it.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#67

Post by soraminazuki »

oefrha wrote: post #63
TooCreative wrote: post #60

I can reproduce it on gmail.com Google seems to hide this via Javascript. To reproduce in Chromium: Enable dev tools, enable "Preserve log", go to settings and enable "Auto-open DevTools for popups". Then click on a link in a mail. Now you can see under the Network tab, that the new window did not go to the link you clicked but to a Google redirect url. I guess Google outputs a normal link in the html but then interc…

> Google seems to hide this via Javascript. I'm like 200% sure Google can't "hide this via JavaScript" (whatever "this" means) in my native mail client if they have actually rewritten the URLs, which is the accusation here.

But you said in another comment that you couldn't reproduce the OP's accusation "including on webmail." Gmail has been rewriting links in the web interface for all users using JavaScript for years now.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#68

Post by oefrha »

soraminazuki wrote: post #67
oefrha wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google seems to hide this via Javascript. I'm like 200% sure Google can't "hide this via JavaScript" (whatever "this" means) in my native mail client if they have actually rewritten the URLs, which is the accusation here.

But you said in another comment that you couldn't reproduce the OP's accusation "including on webmail." Gmail has been rewriting links in the web interface for all users using JavaScript for years now.

Maybe my comment isn't clear when viewed in isolation, but I was (and I believe OP was) talking about rewriting href of a tags, or in the case of bare links, rewriting the text altogether. So adding a data-saferedirecturl attribute and using that in the click handler is entirely different. Btw the data-saferedirecturl attribute is not found in the email bodies when downloaded via IMAP. I didn't check Gmail's REST API but I assume someone else has checked that too with a client using that.

I mean, given the linked screenshots, the accusation is very clear, and no one has thus far reproduced anything close to that.

(Incidentally I'm no stranger to Google redirects. I don't use webmail normally, but I did write an extension to remove the redirects from Google SERP...)

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#69

Post by hnarn »

akerro wrote: post #47
phreack wrote: post #21

This is really urgent if it goes beyond A/B. Possibly even illegal already under some interpretations. It'd finally make me leave Gmail for sure.

>It'd finally make me leave Gmail for sure. If Snowdens leaks didn't make you leave nothing will.

I have used Gmail since you needed an invite to use it and I've never had any other assumption than my e-mails being about as safely tucked away as they would be on a public notice board in a town square, and that Google in addition to this is probably scanning them frenetically to figure out what they, or more specifically their advertisers, can try to sell me.

If I need to send something I actually care about I wouldn't use e-mail in the first place. It's a low-effort type of communication with normal people who don't care about security, so I'm not going to waste time making my end of that line of communication an impenetrable bastion.

Re: Gmail/G Suite now editing URLs in mail message bodies to use Google URL redirect

#70

Post by soraminazuki »

oefrha wrote: post #68
soraminazuki wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you said in another comment that you couldn't reproduce the OP's accusation "including on webmail." Gmail has been rewriting links in the web interface for all users using JavaScript for years now.

Maybe my comment isn't clear when viewed in isolation, but I was (and I believe OP was) talking about rewriting href of a tags, or in the case of bare links, rewriting the text altogether. So adding a data-saferedirecturl attribute and using that in the click handler is entirely different. Btw the data-saferedirecturl attribute is not found in the email bodies when downloaded via IMAP. I didn't check Gmail's REST API…

> So adding a data-saferedirecturl attribute and using that in the click handler is entirely different.

The end result is the same. Gmail is rewriting url in their web interface. While there isn't enough evidence yet to decide whether they're attempting to do the same for IMAP, the fact that they do it in the web interface is undeniably true.

Post reply on HN