PDA

View Full Version : Google: Big Brother Spyware


Dave M.
02-19-2003, 02:17 PM
<< Google deserves your nomination
for Big Brother of the Year

Nominations accepted <A
HREF=http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/us2003/
>here</A> during
February 2003 only

> 1. Google's immortal cookie:
> Google was the first search engine to use a cookie that expires in 2038.
> This was at a time when federal websites were prohibited from using
> persistent cookies altogether. Now it's years later, and immortal cookies
> are commonplace among search engines; Google set the standard because no
> one bothered to challenge them. This cookie places a unique ID number on
> your hard disk. Anytime you land on a Google page, you get a Google cookie
> if you don't already have one. If you have one, they read and record your
> unique ID number.
>
> 2. Google records everything they can:
> For all searches they record the cookie ID, your Internet IP address, the
> time and date, your search terms, and your browser configuration.
> Increasingly, Google is customizing results based on your IP number. This
> is referred to in the industry as "IP delivery based on geolocation."
>
> 3. Google retains all data indefinitely:
> Google has no data retention policies. There is evidence that they are able
> to easily access all the user information they collect and save.
>
> 4. Google won't say why they need this data:
> Inquiries to Google about their privacy policies are ignored. When the New
> York Times (2002-11-28) asked Sergey Brin about whether Google ever gets
> subpoenaed for this information, he had no comment.
>
> 5. Google hires spooks:
> Matt Cutts, a key Google engineer, used to work for the National Security
> Agency. Google wants to hire more people with security clearances, so that
> they can peddle their corporate assets to the spooks in Washington.
>
> 6. Google's toolbar is spyware:
> With the advanced features enabled, Google's free toolbar for Explorer
> phones home with every page you surf. Yes, it reads your cookie too, and
> sends along the last search terms you used in the toolbar. Their privacy
> policy confesses this, but that's only because Alexa lost a class-action
> lawsuit when their toolbar did the same thing, and their privacy policy
> failed to explain this. Worse yet, Google's toolbar updates to new versions
> quietly, and without asking. This means that if you have the toolbar
> installed, Google essentially has complete access to your hard disk every
> time you phone home. Most software vendors, and even Microsoft, ask if
> you'd like an updated version. But not Google.
>
> 7. Google's cache copy is illegal:
> Judging from Ninth Circuit precedent on the application of U.S. copyright
> laws to the Internet, Google's cache copy appears to be illegal. The only
> way a webmaster can avoid having his site cached on Google is to put a
> "noarchive" meta in the header of every page on his site. Surfers like the
> cache, but webmasters don't. Many webmasters have deleted questionable
> material from their sites, only to discover later that the problem pages
> live merrily on in Google's cache. The cache copy should be "opt-in" for
> webmasters, not "opt-out."
>
> 8. Google is not your friend:
> Young, stupid script kiddies and many bloggers still think Google is "way
> kool," so by now Google enjoys a 75 percent monopoly for all external
> referrals to most websites. No webmaster can avoid seeking Google's
> approval these days, assuming he wants to increase traffic to his site. If
> he tries to take advantage of some of the known weaknesses in Google's
> semi-secret algorithms, he may find himself penalized by Google, and his
> traffic disappears. There are no detailed, published standards issued by
> Google, and there is no appeal process for penalized sites. Google is
> completely unaccountable. Most of the time they don't even answer email
> from webmasters.
>
> 9. Google is a privacy time bomb:
> With 150 million searches per day, most from outside the U.S., Google
> amounts to a privacy disaster waiting to happen. Those newly-commissioned
> data-mining bureaucrats in Washington can only dream about the sort of
> slick efficiency that Google has already achieved. Google deserves your <A
HREF="http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/us2003/">
> nomination</A> for corporate Big Brother of the Year.
>

<A HREF="http://www.google-watch.org/
">Google Watch home page</A>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

jon scott
02-19-2003, 06:21 PM
Dave, ( or anybody) How do I protect myself from this problem? Is there a way
to be an internet ghost? casual user Jon Scott
"Dave M." <dmeye@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=9-aFKZbZp1Ae5H141IU2xpL2OrZcPZctDgyFkgC0-030v5pgO_itONnqBSYqt2K9dLY3)> wrote:<< Google deserves your nomination
for Big Brother of the Year

Tony P.
02-19-2003, 08:08 PM
What Google is doing is NOT a big problem I think. As long as you
aren't doing illegal things, it's fine in my opinion. About the
screen capture cache, that's okay I think. Cause webmasters can
always opt-out if it's such a big deal.

thedruid2012
02-20-2003, 06:51 AM
Hi Jon,

Have a look at:

http://www.anonymizer.com/

> Dave, ( or anybody) How do I protect myself from this problem? Is
there a way to be an internet ghost?

Zoe
02-20-2003, 08:13 AM
Here's an alternative view from a friend who seems to know what he is
talking about.
Zoe

> I'm biased but I believe Google is the most responsible corporation I have
> ever seen.
>
> The list below is obviously intended to create fear, uncertainty and
doubt.
> No one in Silicon Valley or the tech community would honestly say that
> hiring ex-NSA people is something people should worry about. How many
> ex-NSA people in CPSR? Lots of NSA people are smart, know large scale
data
> processing, and want to work for a livelier organization than secret (and
> therefore often embarrassingly stupid) government work.
>
> The claims below were debunked by the Slashdot community yesterday fairly
> strenuously. The person who created the list was shown to be the same guy
> who is upset that his system for spamming Google to raise the rankings of
> his clients no longer works. (Thank god for that!)
>
> For a lot of community rebuttals, check
> http://slashdot.org/articles/03/02/18/1433209.shtml?tid=95
>
> Google's REPEATED WARNINGS IN CAPITAL LETTERS about the privacy
implications
> of the Toolbar's advanced features aren't buried at the bottom of some 3
> page "privacy policy". They are right in your face, together with the
> option to install the toolbar and OPT OUT of the privacy sensitive
"advanced
> features". So it is a well informed, Opt in system. Calling it Spyware
is
> an extremely biased smear.
>
> I've already spoken ad-nauseum about cookie paranoia.
>
>
>

Tony P.
02-20-2003, 11:44 AM
I noticed Yahoo!'s searching and Google's searching are incrediably
similar.

Kurt Foy Booker
02-20-2003, 02:17 PM
>I noticed Yahoo!'s searching and Google's searching are incrediably
>similar.

That is because Yahoo uses Google for their searchresults.

Kurt