Privacy Watchdog Asks FTC To Look Into Google's Offline Shopping Tracker (arstechnica.com) 26
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A privacy advocacy group has filed a formal legal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, asking the agency to begin an investigation "into Google's in-store tracking algorithm to determine whether it adequately protects the privacy of millions of American consumers." In the Monday filing, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said it is concerned with Google's new Store Sales Management program, which debuted in May. The system allows the company to extend its online tracking capabilities into the physical world. The idea is to combine credit card and other financial data acquired from data brokers to create a singular profile as a way to illustrate to companies what goods and services are being searched for online, which result in actual in-person sales. Because the algorithm that Google uses is secret, EPIC says, there is no way to determine how well Google's claimed anonymization feature -- to mask names, credit card numbers, location, and other potentially private data -- actually works. While Google has been cagey about exactly how it does this, the company has previously revealed that the technique is based on CryptDB.
google , do no evil (Score:4, Insightful)
Really? Pull the other one. This is evil pure and simple.
And to the people who sell on our data like it was seed corn, stop it unless we give explicit permission.
Re: (Score:2)
You can opt out. Put aside the credit cards and toss the various rebate cards. Shop with cash only.
Perhaps inconvenient in the beginning; but if many go this road, there will be a market for a credit card company that doesn't sell any info about customers. Starting such a company is also an option - some people would happily leave visa etc. for a credit card with an anonymity contract.
If "many" go this road?? Only 5% of the consumer market even gives a shit enough about privacy anymore to even want an anonymity clause. THAT is the problem. 95% of consumers will happily trade their digital soul in exchange for no fees, 5% off every purchase, and a free donut in their birthday.
Also remember how many services are "free" today. Digital souls are highly profitable, and often subsidize the costs of running a business. Would you be willing to pay a $200 annual fee in exchange for anonymity
Re: (Score:1)
Re:google , do no evil (Score:4, Informative)
The only thing I could narrow it down to was Google Maps, as usual not actually exiting when it was quit and running quietly in the background. Whether that means it is sending records of my physical location to Google constantly, or somehow listening all the time to be triggered by some signal when I enter a store is irrelevant.
It is done by something Google is doing on my phone (and millions of others), is a complete breach of privacy, and not based on anything as specific as a credit card as I never made purchases in most places it asked about and they don't have any of my card info.
Already pervasive across all credit cards (Score:5, Informative)
Multiple credit card companies are already doing this. Our merchant services company offered us this same data. Of course Google is tracking everything you do. But they can only do it with the willing help of Visa/Mastercard.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. There are a number of companies now offering not just your credit card data but which ads subgroups of people look online, what they buy in the real world and together with location data shared from cell phone apps and ad beacons, together with gaze tracking, even what real world ads they view and paths they take in places like malls.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
According to the sales people, it is, the costs to get into these things are huge though, not for your average business. The data feeds alone are hundreds of thousands per year and require nearly a datacenter but they can get you whatever sales info you want but they nicely tie together Social Media and Credit Card Transactions with Location Data.
Re: (Score:3)
If it increases Wallmart's revenue by 0.25%, that's an extra billion dollars.
You say privacy violation. (Score:2)
I imagine the folks at the Federal Trade Commission are pretty shook up about this.
Wrong (Score:1)
"..there is no way to determine how well Google's claimed anonymization feature -- to mask names, credit card numbers, location, and other potentially private data -- actually works."
Its right there in the title "Google's claimed anonymization feature" ....so it doesn't work at all.
Wow! (Score:2)
Why not just also forbid the fidelity cards etc, which do exactly the same thing.
Bought some shelves at yesterday. (Score:2)
I spent a while in the shelving department at a store; did no related searches, took no pictures.. (was there to look at PS4 vs Xbone game selections, so was looking for shelves to put it on, maybe) ended up buying a unit with cash.
Today I got multiple ads for shelving units on sale at that same store.
I keep location services turned off...
Re: (Score:2)