PDA

View Full Version : Google: Big Brother Spyware



Dave M.
02-19-2003, 03:17 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, 07:21 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, 09:08 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, 07:51 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, 09:13 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, 12:44 PM
i noticed yahoo!'s searching and google's searching are incrediably
similar.

Kurt Foy Booker
02-20-2003, 03:17 PM
>i noticed yahoo!'s searching and google's searching are incrediably
>similar.

that is because yahoo uses google for their searchresults.

kurt