Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 10, 2016, 02:55:39 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: Google lovers, Chrome adapters- Google Chrome`s meticulous caring privacy policy  (Read 8069 times)

kartal

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 1,529
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
I am trying to warn people about Google`s shady privacy practices and data mining here as frequently as possible. I hope that the highlights below could make open your eyes little more.


"Be sure to read Chrome's fine print"
http://news.cnet.com..._109-10030522-2.html

here is the slashdot discussion page about privacy policy aspect of Chrome
http://yro.slashdot....0247205&from=rss

You can also listen this interview with Daniel J. Solove(from it Conversations) about what your privacy is and why it should be imporant.
"Understanding Privacy"
http://itc.conversat...hows/detail3805.html
« Last Edit: September 03, 2008, 08:31:18 AM by kartal »

allen

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,192
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
...reading the links in Chrome, take note google :D

Ehtyar

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,237
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
I am trying to warn people about Google`s shady privacy practices and data mining here as frequently as possible.
Good man, keep it up.

Ehtyar.

Mark0

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile
    • Mark's home
    • Donate to Member
Parts of the EULA were simply lifted from other services - were supposedly they made some sense.
It's now corrected:

TapTheHive - This Post Not Made In Chrome; Google's EULA Sucks Is Fixed

Quote
11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.

12. Software updates ...

Bye!

f0dder

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,029
  • [Well, THAT escalated quickly!]
    • View Profile
    • f0dder's place
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Mark0: that's better, but what does it say about google's rights to datamine?
- carpe noctem

Mark0

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile
    • Mark's home
    • Donate to Member
This is all I found:

Matt Cutts: Preventing paranoia: when does Google Chrome talk to Google.com?

Quote
For better or worse, my blog is popular with the Google conspiracy-theorist demographic. I knew that as soon as Google Chrome launched, some readers would ask tough questions about privacy and how/when Google Chrome communicates with google.com.

So I decided to tackle this issue head-on. I talked to the Chrome team to find out if there’s anything to worry about. The short answer is no. For the long answer, read on.

f0dder

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,029
  • [Well, THAT escalated quickly!]
    • View Profile
    • f0dder's place
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
From that blog post, things sounds quite reasonable.

If there aren't other "privacy issues" than that, and there aren't going to be, then imho there's nothing to fuzz about. And since it's opensores, people can keep watch... but oh yeah, <tinfoilhat>google could do different builds than from the publicly available source</tinfoilhat>
- carpe noctem

Mark0

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile
    • Mark's home
    • Donate to Member
I think that they know that someone eventually will be able to sniff all the traffic Chrome make, interpret / decrypt it, and blog out for all the Digg / Reddit population to see, if there's something even remotely strange! :)

fenixproductions

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,184
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
We know about Chrome now but what about GoogleUpdate.exe? This guy is not open sourced.
Google is against me because I cannot find an info what data this app sends ;)

This makes me wonder:
HKCU\Software\Google\Update\UsageStats\

Ehtyar

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,237
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
We know about Chrome now but what about GoogleUpdate.exe? This guy is not open sourced.
Google is against me because I cannot find an info what data this app sends ;)

This makes me wonder:
HKCU\Software\Google\Update\UsageStats\
Couldn't have said it better myself. People forget that this thing is scheduled to run when idle.

Ehtyar.

alivingspirit

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 167
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Google lovers, Chrome adapters- Google Chrome`s meticulous caring privacy po
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2008, 08:25:37 AM »
since it's opensores, people can keep watch...

Ouch! ;D

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Some info on changes promised for the Chrome EULA over at ArsTechnica

http://arstechnica.c...-well-change-it.html

Quote
Google's Rebecca Ward, Senior Product Counsel for Google Chrome, now tells Ars Technica that the company tries to reuse these licenses as much as possible, "in order to keep things simple for our users." Ward admits that sometimes "this means that the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that don't apply well to the use of that product" and says that Google is "working quickly to remove language from Section 11 of the current Google Chrome terms of service. This change will apply retroactively to all users who have downloaded Google Chrome."

It's worth noting that the EULA is largely unenforceable because the source code of Chrome is distributed under an open license. Users could simply download the source code, compile it themselves, and use it without having to agree to Google's EULA. The terms of the BSD license under which the source code is distributed are highly permissive and impose virtually no conditions or requirements on end users.

So, there you have it: a tempest in a (chrome) teapot. Not that it's the only one;

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
http://arstechnica.c...-well-change-it.html

Quote
...
It's worth noting that the EULA is largely unenforceable because the source code of Chrome is distributed under an open license. Users could simply download the source code, compile it themselves, and use it without having to agree to Google's EULA. The terms of the BSD license under which the source code is distributed are highly permissive and impose virtually no conditions or requirements on end users.
....

I find that a little ironic - they're saying they cant enforce how we use the browser
The problem here is that we dont know how they are going to use this browser -
from that point of view (i.e. how the EULA limits/effects their actions) it's important

[apologies I havent read the article but had to respond to that quote]

edit/ okay not so bad as it seemed, the excerpt I kept is from the ArsTechnica writer (initially I thought it from google spokesperson), but it is important to look at it from that point of view - we want the eula to limit what google can do ...
Tom
« Last Edit: September 04, 2008, 04:09:52 PM by tomos »

Ehtyar

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,237
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Not only that, but how many people are going to be running around downloading unofficial builds?

Ehtyar.

Darwin

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,984
    • View Profile
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
From that blog post, things sounds quite reasonable.

If there aren't other "privacy issues" than that, and there aren't going to be, then imho there's nothing to fuzz about. And since it's opensores, people can keep watch... but oh yeah, <tinfoilhat>google could do different builds than from the publicly available source</tinfoilhat>

Very true. The tinfoil hat wearing side of me is adopting a wait and see approach - just being prudent. I just want to give Google time to clean up the EULA and smarter people than me time to determine what is, or what is not, being done with the data that Google may or may not be mining...
"Some people have a way with words, other people,... oh... have not way" - Steve Martin

kartal

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 1,529
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
From that blog post, things sounds quite reasonable.

If there aren't other "privacy issues" than that, and there aren't going to be, then imho there's nothing to fuzz about. And since it's opensores, people can keep watch... but oh yeah, <tinfoilhat>google could do different builds than from the publicly available source</tinfoilhat>

Very true. The tinfoil hat wearing side of me is adopting a wait and see approach - just being prudent. I just want to give Google time to clean up the EULA and smarter people than me time to determine what is, or what is not, being done with the data that Google may or may not be mining...

Were you able to decide on what to do with Google? Now that the time of the benefit of doubt is over regarding the latest guardian releases.



Darwin

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,984
    • View Profile
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
From that blog post, things sounds quite reasonable.

If there aren't other "privacy issues" than that, and there aren't going to be, then imho there's nothing to fuzz about. And since it's opensores, people can keep watch... but oh yeah, <tinfoilhat>google could do different builds than from the publicly available source</tinfoilhat>

Very true. The tinfoil hat wearing side of me is adopting a wait and see approach - just being prudent. I just want to give Google time to clean up the EULA and smarter people than me time to determine what is, or what is not, being done with the data that Google may or may not be mining...

Were you able to decide on what to do with Google? Now that the time of the benefit of doubt is over regarding the latest guardian releases.




Chrome hasn't been anywhere near my computers since 2008. I've been happy with IE8,9,10, and now 11 long ago lost interest in keeping up with developments in other browsers. Now, the wisdom of doing this is probably open for debate, but I don't do much more than read forums about software and wristwatches and have an up to date AV, so figure that I'm as safe as I can be.
"Some people have a way with words, other people,... oh... have not way" - Steve Martin

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,550
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member

Sorry this is slightly tangential, but it's in the "privacy" arena.

"Element Hiding Helper for Adblock" is interesting. Because sometimes the developers keep "simple names" to their functions, aka good "internal coding", but then it's also in our favor that it's not obfuscated.

So I just found "http://bits.wikimedia.org/geoiplookup" on Wikipedia.

That's right... and surely it's symbolic of tons of other less "reputable" pages. So there's cold hard proof cousin to those "Hi! Hot Dates are in Your_Area"! Ads.

In a way that it's on Wikipedia, it's the sad symbol that "Free" frequently means "priced with non-cash intangibles".

4wd

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 4,477
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
So I just found "http://bits.wikimedia.org/geoiplookup" on Wikipedia.

Impressive, it's within 400m of where I am - most usually only get to the ISP's interconnect which is ~30km away.

Switching to 3G puts me in the middle of Melbourne, ~50km away.

I wonder what info is being requested/sent that whoever WikiMedia are using, (possibly MaxMind), is able to narrow it down to the suburb rather than the ISP's presence.