Google's Data-Storage Fuels Privacy Fears

taoman1 writes "Facing worries about its tracking Web surfers' every move, Google Inc. is now offering a feature to track Web surfers' every move. Its free Web History service is strictly voluntary — Google users can sign up to have the Internet giant keep detailed records of every website they visit so they can easily find them again later. Web History's quiet debut this week came as privacy advocates continued to raise alarms about the prospect of Google combining its collection of information on individuals with that of DoubleClick Inc. Google has agreed to acquire the New York-based company, which distributes Web ads and tracks where the majority of people go on the Internet, for $3.1 billion."

Because as we all know...

[MikeRT (947531)]

Every sensible human being wants every chance to get context-free, "damning evidence" stored in perpetuity. How the hell can you even call this a "feature" for 99.99% of the people out there since it's more likely to result in them getting in trouble for something, than being able to say "oh, that's the search I made a year ago that was really good at getting what I wanted!"

Re:Because as we all know...

[hpavc (129350)]

Its an awesome feature, by looking at the history its obvious what content I researching and what content I am interested in on a daily basis for work and play. I cannot wait until the next step where it can use this data to refine my actual searching using this, my gmail, and bookmarks ... or maybe a personalized 'news' portal, effectively like a digg.

I am glad Google has the balls to be the one who is honest about having it and bold enough to display a tool for it.

That should be obvious to you already

[MikeRT (947531)]

Do you suffer from a memory-damaging illness or injury? If not, then how could you not already know what it is you are generally interested in?

Re:

[DrEldarion (114072)]

So don't use it?

It's completely opt-in. All the people who don't want to use it can just keep going on as they are, and all the people who do want to use it can turn it on. I don't see what the problem is or why "privacy" tinfoil-hat-wearers are freaking out.

"In other news, privacy advocates are protesting the sale of camcorders. 'They can be used to track you, and no good can come of it! They should be banned!', one said in an interview earlier today."

Others Features We All Want to Volunteer For

[WED Fan (911325)]

Google says you can opt in for this. They suggest other great ideas to opt in for:

• Extra Fuel Burner - Your car uses twice as much fuel as the stated MPG
• Credit Broadcaster - A great tool to notify internet users about your credit rating, account balances, and account numbers
• Wife Notifier - lets your spouse know every chat room you go to

Why does this surprise anybody?

[Rosco P. Coltrane (209368)]

I've been suspicious of Google's "do no evil" motto from day one, but my suspicions were confirmed when it was announced that Google Mail would be storing your emails ad-infinitum even if you deleted them. It is quite clear and obvious (and it has been for a long time) that Google is in the datamining business, the targeted advertisement part of which is only the tip of the iceberg. Anybody who's surprised by this announcement has been living in a cave...

Re:Why does this surprise anybody?

[dissy (172727)]

but my suspicions were confirmed when it was announced that Google Mail would be storing your emails ad-infinitum even if you deleted them.

And this announced policy outrages you more than the fact governments want the same exact thing forced upon all ISPs?

Re:

[WED Fan (911325)]

Google is Evil!

I've got 5 GMail accounts, including this one, that I use for the sole purpose of spam catching. If Google wants to archive all my spam, great. I check the accounts on the order of once or twice a month and have yet to see their spam filter work efficiently.

Re:

[johansalk (818687)]

I have a few email accounts for different purposes (eg, usenet, official correspondence, etc - see, i don't want people whom i have official correspondence with find out my views on all things by google my usenet posts), and google freaked me out when it merged all my account so that my real name from the official correspondence gmail actually showed up on the account for the usenet nonsense stuff! I can not remove it, there's no setting for it, eventhough I'd set name and whatever it is that's in the prefe

Re:Why does this surprise anybody?

[electrosoccertux (874415)]

I've been suspicious of Google's "do no evil" motto from day one, but my suspicions were confirmed when it was announced that Google Mail would be storing your emails ad-infinitum even if you deleted them. It is quite clear and obvious (and it has been for a long time) that Google is in the datamining business, the targeted advertisement part of which is only the tip of the iceberg. Anybody who's surprised by this announcement has been living in a cave...

So, I've seen the thing work...in quite a spooky way...first hand...several times...

The search? Various hot women by their name. I did a search once for pics of and it came up with 3-4 pages of results, and only one or two pictures of interest.

Skip forward several months (I haven't deleted the searching history) and I do another search for Eva Longoria I think it was, and on the first page was the --entirely unrelated-- picture of that other woman I had searched for earlier. I've seen this happen on two different occassions before when searching under the same category. Very interesting, it's like they programmed it to know when you were searching for a hot celebrity and to insert previous pages you had visited under the same category in that search. Depending on how you look at it, kinda useful, but nonetheless creepy.

Creepy is as creepy does.

[ScrewMaster (602015)]

Depending on how you look at it, kinda useful, but nonetheless creepy.

Almost thirty years, back in the Apple ][ days, ago a friend of mine was playing a text adventure game (I forget which one). So, after he played the thing for a while, it asked him a question using his first name. He got all freaked out, "How did it know my name?!!"

I told him "Because when you started the game it asked you for it."

"Oh."

Re:

[LordSnooty (853791)]

Maybe many other people searched for Eva Whatzisname then your second celebrity in quick succession (do they look the same, share similar features?) Enough people searched for two different people in successive visits that datamining software made a link between the two. Could be an alternative explanation.

I'm unsure how Google could reliably track an individual across a time period of months or even weeks unless one of the following is true: 0) IP address is same on both visits; 1) Google retrieved cookie

Re:

[electrosoccertux (874415)]

I'm unsure how Google could reliably track an individual across a time period of months or even weeks unless one of the following is true: 0) IP address is same on both visits; 1) Google retrieved cookie from previous visit; 2) User was logged on with Google Account during both visits; 3) User has Google Toolbar or some other software on top of the browser. So, if this is really a worry (and it would surely be detailed in their privacy policy), just use Google without being logged in, without any Toolbar software and clear cookies after each visit. As long as they don't deploy additional covert measures and as long as everything the do operate is outlined it the privacy policy, they 'do no evil' line cannot be called into question.

They're only rolling out the search history stuff for those^^^ people.

Re:

[Reziac (43301)]

Hmmm... I've noticed different results when I use old Netscape 3 (which I do most of the time, and nearly always with Google), and Mozilla. And I think it's because however Google sets their ID/login cookie does not happen automatically with NS3. (*IF* I log in manually, then it sticks for a few weeks, but then goes away by itself.) Whereas when I use Moz, I'm obviously logged in all the time whether I did it or not -- it IDs me by my gmail address.

And I think it's reasonable to assume that search companies

Facts please! Re:Why does this surprise anybody?

[crunzh (1082841)]

Ummm where does this come from? I cant seem to locate any statements to support this and the gmail TOS seem to indicate that the email is deleted permanently. So please backup your statements and don't spred rumors.

Re:

[rikkus-x (526844)]

Whether storing your email forever is evil depends on what they actually do with it. Do you have any evidence that they're doing more than data mining? Or that they're doing something more with the data they extract than using it to ensure they give you relevant advertising and better services?

Please do enlighten us as to what you think the rest of this 'iceberg' consists of. Personally, I'm off to sign up for them to remember everything I do with my browser. If I want to do anything which I'm bothered abo

Re:Why does this surprise anybody?

[DrEldarion (114072)]

Wait, I'm missing why keeping your data for services you choose to use while knowing the terms you're using them under is considered "evil".

Perhaps if they showed themselves to be doing something evil with that data... but they haven't. Just having the data is not evil in itself.

Re:

[ady1 (873490)]

1. At anytime you can delete your google account. here: EditServices [google.com]

2. The search history feature is for your ease of use. They could've (read must been) simply stored your history without letting you use it.

Re:

[mutende (13564)]

They could've (read must been) simply stored your history without letting you use it.

They did. After I enabled web history for my Google account, I could see web history dating back to from before I enabled it. So the change only means that I have access to the data now.

Re:Why does this surprise anybody?

[Puff of Logic (895805)]

I've been suspicious of Google's "do no evil" motto from day one,

Indeed. Every time I hear something like this about Google, I have a vision of an old decrepit geek sitting inside a tin shack fifty years from now. In the light of flickering screens that cut in and out as the pirate net connection goes in and out, he regards the semi-circle of small children who have come to hear him regale them with tales of how it used to be. "Tell us again, Grandfather, of the days when no-one was tracked on Googlenet and anyone could say anything," they cry in Los Angeles pidgin, a mix of English, Spanish, and Mandarin. The old man smiles but his eyes look haunted. "Oh children, once there was a time when the network wasn't even called Googlenet and the Watchers were just a company called Google! Back then, they had a motto: 'Do No Evil.' If only we'd known, little ones. If only we'd known what was coming and that they meant to stop anyone from doing 'evil'". The old man reaches up with a shaky hand and rubs his fingers over the scar where his Googlenet access chip was forcibly removed. Almost inaudibly, he whispers "Who knew that protesting the government was evil?"

And then sometimes I just get a vision of the Deathstar with a giant 'G' on it and the Imperial March playing, which is a bit more amusing.

Hmm, perhaps I think about this stuff too much!

Re:

[rm69990 (885744)]

When was Gmail messages stored forever announced? Could you provide a link?

Privacy Advocates

[gravesb (967413)]

There are far worse threats to privacy than Google. Watch out for continued government laws that require ISPs of all flavors to maintain data for long periods of time, and to turn it over to law enforcement for less and less stringent requirements. If you are worried about your privacy, don't sign up for the stupid service. Rotate your search engines. Use random Wi-Fi hotspots. If people want their privacy protected, they need to take responsibility for it. You reduce your privacy, and you get free services and make some services easier to use. Most people are ok with that. Whether its because they don't care about their privacy or they are stupid doesn't really matter. They made a choice, they don't need advocates fighting to put the cat back in the bag. They most certainly don't need corporations looking out for their privacy interests, unless its a selling point. Businesses provide services and make money. They don't take care of you. Take responsibility for yourself.

Re:

[PineGreen (446635)]

Exactly! Everyone should take care of their own privacy. What pisses me off, however, is that if you don't care about your privacy, every American thinks you must be a moron and stupid. I really couldn't care less if they have all my browsing history, including all porn sites that I visit, my present and past phone numbers, times I go to the toilet and similar... I just don't understand the American obsession with privacy; in Europe we don't have such problems. (that is why Yanks can't understand how we all

OHMY GOOOD!!!

[Colin Smith (2679)]

I might have to...

Clear My Cookies!!!!!!!!!

Y'know. You don't have to use Google and you don't have to retain all the cookies your machine is sent.

 

Why can't I

[gitarman (643115)]

Why can't I get the same storage service Alberto Gonzolez gets at the RNC?

so what?

[romit_icarus (613431)]

The web history feature is completely consistent with what Google has been striving for - i.e. to provide smart services operating at large scales, in exchange with the role of the 'indexer' of all internet experiences.

And you forget - that this feature us purely voluntary, and by default is set to off.

CustomizeGoogle

[by Anonymous Coward]

For the paranoids I'd recommend the CustomizeGoogle [customizegoogle.com] firefox extension - among other things (like removing those pesky ads) it can reduce the ability for Google to track what you are doing.

Beagle?

[by Anonymous Coward]

How is this different from the Search tool in Gnome called "Beagle". Sure I realize Beagle is stored locally on "your" hardware, but remember when you get in trouble there is no more "your". A raid at your residence, or a court order to google / your isp gets you in the same place at the end if you are indeed "evil". In the US the SS is always in power ladies and gents. If your some kind of hacker of some sort where you need to protect yourself and privacy because you are engaging in illegal activities on the net, you have got major problems to begin with. If your connected to some sort of maffia, you have got major problems to begin with as well.

It IS 1984 in all respects of the book and film. You realize the net tracks everything and knows everything about everyone. Unless your living up in Montana, working at the local grocery store getting paid in cash off the books (no credit card, no phone, no electricity etc...) you have NO PRIVACY already.

Good luck on ranting about teh Google, they are simply making it easier for you to research your search history on the net.

Re:

[Ph33r th3 g(O)at (592622)]

WTF? Beagle at least doesn't call home, like Google Desktop Search and Yahoo Desktop Search (a.k.a. X1 Seach) do. What difference would it make on an unencrypted drive whether you have desktop search software installed or not? If the gendarmes kick down your door, and they want to search your drive, they can mount an image of it and point their own search tool at it, be that a desktop search tool, or forensic search software like ilook or Encase--not having Beagle installed isn't going to save you.

Look at DoubleClick's IP - it gets clearer

[Patent-Monkey (1036772)]

Key DoubleClick assets from a recent post we did:

US Patent 7039599 - Automatic Placement of Advertising [patentmonkey.com]
Highlight: Claim 1. "A method for advertisement selection, comprising: (a) receiving from an advertiser Web site feedback representing user transactions at the advertiser Web site, the user transactions resulting from user response to at least one of a plurality of direct advertisements; (b) receiving a request to display a direct advertisement to a user; and (c) selecting, in response to the request, one of the plurality of direct advertisements for display based at least in part upon the advertiser feedback."

Analysis: This patent has a priority back to 1997 and allows for advertiser feedback from users on a website. Given Google's move into CPA, this patent would clearly provide added leverage to allow more data to flow between the advertiser and Google's system to optimize which ads should be displayed at a publisher.

US Patent 7085682 - Analyzing Website Activity [patentmonkey.com]
Highlight: A large number of independent claims covering the tracking and reporting of user activities to provide analysis of event level detail, which includes the addition of the retaining details of users' adding products to shopping carts, and repeat usage of a client site.

Analysis: In addition to the above, Google's analysis and reporting features for a tool like Analytics for a CPA advertiser become even more robust allowing for unique visitor tracking and loyalty. A robust addition to Google Analytics to be sure.

US Patent 5948061 - Delivering, Targeting and Measuring Online Ads [patentmonkey.com]
Highlight: What all consumer privacy folks have feared for the last 12 years. The tracking of user specific information and the performance and ongoing management of ad delivery based on user information.

Analysis: Whether we like it or not, Google retains a lot of information about our searches connected to our profiles. This technology does what the original vision of DoubleClick was built on: user-level targeted ads.

This announcement was easy to see coming.

I am trying out Google Web Search

[hansamurai (907719)]

I signed up for it this week, to give it a trial run. Well, actually I've been using Google's Search History since its inception and I really like that. Being able to find things I searched for in the past makes my life a lot easier sometimes. I know it could potentially be a big privacy problem for me but it's something I choose to do and I know the risks. Anyways, Google Web Search, their new feature, requires the Google Web Toolbar, which I don't use on any of my computers, because I never really saw

use scroogle scraper...

[mark_osmd (812581)]

When you're really worried about tracking from google, why not use scroogle scraper?: http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm [scroogle.org] Mark

Re:

[AlHunt (982887)]

Or ixquick.com?

Ixquick's position:

You have a right to privacy.
Your search data should never fall into the wrong hands.
The only real solution is deleting your data.
We delete our users' privacy data within 48 hrs.
We are the first and only search engine to do so.
Our initiative is receiving an overw

Did anyone actually check out this feature?

[Creepyguywithastick (934101)]

...Before getting all pissed off about privacy violation? Google has always logged your web history, the only thing really new about this is the fact that you can view it all from one page and, more importantly, you can choose to delete your entire history and pause it indefinitely. Explain to me how adding this is a bad thing.

Re:

[KixAre4Kids (1090793)]

But the user-facing web history has nothing to do with the internal data Google is keeping about your searches. The internal data has much more detail: where you were coming from when you did the search, which ads and links they showed you in the results, which you click on (and which you *didn't*), whether you came back later for more. All of this and more! And believe me they do *not* delete it when you delete your web history, or cookies.

It is the cost to you of having access to so powerful a tool.

Re:

[Achromatic1978 (916097)]

You can choose to delete your history? Wow. You can choose to delete your mail from Gmail too, but they state upfront (well, buried in the T&Cs) that that in no way means that they delete the information. See the problem?

Google hates your privacy

[Vexorian (959249)]

I am starting to feat that the real issue with google is not that they want to spy every move we make but that they actually tell us about the way they handle our information.

What if the other web services do things that endanger our privacy in similar or worse ways without telling us? Reminds me of the AOL data leak...

at least they are open about it

[nanosquid (1074949)]

There are probably half a dozen institutions collecting this kind of data about you: your ISP, a couple of federal and state agencies, several advertising networks, etc. At least Google is open about it and you can have a look at the data.

TrackMeNot

[mnemonic_ (164550)]

Another reason to get the TrackMeNot Firefox extension [mozilla.org], which performs random Google queries constantly in the background. It frustrates attempts at identifying a user through search term frequency analysis.

Re:

[asninn (1071320)]

Yeah, great idea!

1. Sign up and opt in to use this feature
2. Use TrackMeNot to make it useless
3. Profit!

Seriously, wouldn't it be easier to, you know, just refrain from opting in?

Re:

[mochan_s (536939)]

Also suggest FoxyProxy and Tor for Google searches.

Though the problem is sometimes you connect to german or chinese google site and your results are skewed in the native language. However, reading Google ads for strange strange things is priceless.

Re:Stricly Voluntary

[Hennell (1005107)]

The privacy advocates arnt worried about themselves. They're making a scene because they want to make sure people who do 'volunteer' know what they might be signing away.
Some snippets FTA: -
"most Google users don't know that their search queries can be tied to them"

"When Google users were asked whether they believed that the company captured data that could be used to identify them, 77% said no."

Re:

[b0s0z0ku (752509)]

Over 150 emails, going back over 2 years, disappeared from my inbox one night and they said there was nothing they could do to restore them....

Yep, same here. I hope that their paying customers are treated better than that!

-b.

Re:What data storage?

[russ1337 (938915)]

because the NSA are not very good at giving back the hardware to the company from which they subpoenaed it.

Re:

[compm375 (847701)]

People would use it for the same reason they would use any web service - It is accessible from anywhere.

Re:

[pasamio (737659)]

Because some of us use more than one computer. Like on my desktop I use Epiphany for regular stuff and Firefox when I need to do web dev stuff. Then I have my Mac, which is Safari and Firefox (same rule, spend most of my time in Safari since I go to multiple networks). Then when I go to work I (funnily enough) work on items that are personally interesting (I love my job) so sometimes what I search at home is relevant at work and vice versa, some times what I research at work is relevant to things I want to

Re:

[ColdWetDog (752185)]

Yeah, it's going to be the videos you uploaded to YouTube (remember those videos?) That'll get you hosed....

Re:

[Torvaun (1040898)]

Faulty logic. By that reasoning, Australia is full of criminals, because that's how it was years ago when the British Empire dumped them there. When the United States and it's manifest destiny started moving out to absorb the 'Wild West,' that was just the beginning of the end for civilization, because you have to average the levels of civilization, rather than accept that the acquirer will adjust the acquiree to be more like itself. What I see from this deal is a probable decrease in the number of flash

Re:

[superpulpsicle (533373)]

Lol isn't that the whole part of an evil cult. You don't know you are part of it until the day you drink vodka with cyanide.

Re:Is it wrong of me to actually like this service

[sirkha (1015441)]

Its all the 13 year olds searching for porn that don't want their parents to find out.