4 ms·

Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? I watched the entire hearing, it was pretty in

Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? I watched the entire hearing, it was pretty interesting. I was surprised how ignorant many of the senators were of the subject matter on hand. Some of them clearly didn't understand the difference between Facebook and the Internet. Or they thought that Facebook, Google, Twitter, were all the same thing, this mysterious "Internet" and somehow Zuckerberg was in charge of it all. Some of the questions were impossible to answer because they made no sense and they kept hammering him for not answering it. Then there were senators basically trying to guilt trip him into endorsing their bill when he already said he supports the principle behind it but it would depend on the details.

confounded 9y ago
> Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No, but you could argue that Google are.
EquallyJust 9y ago
Both Google Analytics and Facebook's interest based ads/"shadow" profiles work similarly. You can opt out of Google's interest based ads via https://adssettings.google.com https://adssettings.google.com and Facebook's interest based ads via https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings without having to have an account with either. I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service.
- shock 9y ago
  > I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service. Based on what? Did you talk to someone in the know? Are you just speculating?
johnchristopher 9y ago
> Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No. They are asking for permissions (cookies law in the EU) because the GA code works that way. They bundle the consent in the legal text of the cookie notice. Users give consent, everything's fine. Then the site managers send this data over to Google with the GA code. Google applies it's labeling machine to the data, link it to a user with its super cookie tech and finally give an anonymised report to the site's manager. If the site manager is asked by a user to remove data the standard answer should be something like "we don't have it and so we can't delete it, call Google". Then when a user asks to Google for removal of its data things'll get interesting because Google will be removing a droplet from its ocean of data and a tenth digit will be rounded somewhere. That's how a site manager who uses only GA/pixel should manage the situation. Proving they didn't leak that private data and aren't using it.
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  That's not going to fly in about a month under GPDR: 1. A standard cookie notice is nowhere near granular enough about different possible uses to qualify as informed consent. 2. I'm pretty sure Google Analytics is just a "processor" rather than a "controller" under GDPR, so much of the onus for following the regulations is still on the person using GA rather than on GA itself. Processors would not be responsible for handling deletion requests from individual; they would just need to make it possible for controllers to handle them. Obviously processors that take as much of the responsibility as possible will be much more attractive service providers for controllers, but the controllers can't just pass the buck to processors.

confounded 9y ago

> Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No, but you could argue that Google are.

EquallyJust 9y ago

Both Google Analytics and Facebook's interest based ads/"shadow" profiles work similarly. You can opt out of Google's interest based ads via https://adssettings.google.com https://adssettings.google.com and Facebook's interest based ads via https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings https://www.facebook.com/ads/settings without having to have an account with either. I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service.

shock 9y ago
> I don't believe either "shadow" profiles are every associated with an account or personal details even when you make an account on the associated service. Based on what? Did you talk to someone in the know? Are you just speculating?

johnchristopher 9y ago

> Isn't anyone who has Google Analytics installed on a page collecting information and creating "shadow" profiles? No. They are asking for permissions (cookies law in the EU) because the GA code works that way. They bundle the consent in the legal text of the cookie notice. Users give consent, everything's fine. Then the site managers send this data over to Google with the GA code. Google applies it's labeling machine to the data, link it to a user with its super cookie tech and finally give an anonymised report to the site's manager. If the site manager is asked by a user to remove data the standard answer should be something like "we don't have it and so we can't delete it, call Google". Then when a user asks to Google for removal of its data things'll get interesting because Google will be removing a droplet from its ocean of data and a tenth digit will be rounded somewhere. That's how a site manager who uses only GA/pixel should manage the situation. Proving they didn't leak that private data and aren't using it.

TheCoelacanth 9y ago
That's not going to fly in about a month under GPDR: 1. A standard cookie notice is nowhere near granular enough about different possible uses to qualify as informed consent. 2. I'm pretty sure Google Analytics is just a "processor" rather than a "controller" under GDPR, so much of the onus for following the regulations is still on the person using GA rather than on GA itself. Processors would not be responsible for handling deletion requests from individual; they would just need to make it possible for controllers to handle them. Obviously processors that take as much of the responsibility as possible will be much more attractive service providers for controllers, but the controllers can't just pass the buck to processors.