97 ms·

Chrome 69 will keep Google Cookies when you tell it to delete all cookies

2364 points by jwildeboer 8y ago

unknown5 8y ago
How has it been this long and no one pointed out the obvious joke here: Chrome 69 - Fucking users right in the face
housingpost 8y ago
I recommend that anyone that has a problem with this in Europe file a GDPR complaint, and if you're in the US file a complaint with your attorney general. Some states' attornies general are looking for new ways to come down on Google, and this is a good start. If you have a setting to delete all cookies and it doesn't do that, that's against the law in some places.
- chii 8y ago
  How can GDPR apply to processes running locally on your machine? At best, you can claim misleading advertising (which, is often handled by the fair trade commission or something similar, and often has to show damages before they can award anything).
  - ctavan 8y ago
    I recommend this read: https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-case-study https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-ca...
    - czechdeveloper 8y ago
      Your url does not work for me (404), this one does: https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-case-study-on-the-example-of-chrome-browser-change/ https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-ca...
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
    GDPR can apply to personal data on a piece of paper. What matters is the data, and what is done with it. Does that cookie get read by Google? Of course, or there would be no point. Does it enhance their tracking? Most likely. Is there a GDPR compliant opt-out without loss of features? At first glance it seems not.
  - tveita 8y ago
    They're tampering with the expected operation of the browser so that even after the user explicitly told them not to it still sends personally identifiable tracking information to their servers. I'm glad the GDPR is in effect, so instead of "this should be illegal" we can say "of course this is blatantly illegal". I hope they get a fine for this, with multipliers for how deliberate it is, and for keeping on defending the behaviour even after being called out.
- buster 8y ago
  I'd recommend supporting https://noyb.eu/ https://noyb.eu/ though.
- zumbof 8y ago
  I don't understand why something like that would be illegal under the GDPR. You are told when you wipe your cookies that Google cookies won't be deleted. Also your browser letting you wipe your cookies is not some kind of human right.
  - DarkWiiPlayer 8y ago
    No it doesn't. Press Ctrl+Shift+Del and it takes you directly to a screen that lets you "delete cookies", which it apparently doesn't. What's surprising about that being illegal? They are literally lying to their users about their privacy.
    - zumbof 8y ago
      Just tried it on 69.0.3497.100 and all cookies were deleted and I was logged out from the browser. I also remember seeing a message "you will stay signed on to your Google account" but it seems to have disappeared (or maybe it only shows if you have sync enabled which I don't)
      - askmike 8y ago
        That's not the behavior we are arguing about here though.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  I'd recommend not using chrom{e,ium} instead. They might be 'forced' by a court to apply bandaids, but they'll just find some new area to exploit.
  - Cthulhu_ 8y ago
    Not just that but also risk a big fine; "regular" GDPR violations (when warnings are ignored) can be tens of millions, anti-trust fines can be half a billion easily. The EU compensates for tax loopholes via big fines.
    - craftyguy 8y ago
      The best way to communicate "stop doing stupid shit" to google is not use their services/applications when they do stupid shit. Losing market share/customers is far more impactful than any (currently possible) fines.
      - Sharlin 8y ago
        Losing a few techies who care about things like this when Google has literally billions of users? This is exactly what governments are meant for.
      - simion314 8y ago
        It is still anti competitive, a browser that has special rules/code for the browser maker websites. Next they could give their own websites permissions that other websites don't have by default and that you could not remove(or need to find a convoluted way to remove), ex they could give google webpages permissions to access your webcam and microphone by default. This illegal things needs to be stopped it is not enough that only the people that understand it stop using Chrome.
        marcusarmstrong 8y ago
        That has already been done with video auto play.
- AndersSandvik 8y ago
  You can do it here https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787 https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787
rajaganesh87 8y ago
I think this is required for my-activity to work - https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity
- Drakim 8y ago
  I really hope not, no way Google can just change the nature of cookies in their browser to suit one of their services, it's just too much.
- onion2k 8y ago
  If I build a service that needs a cookie to persist in the event of a user purging their cookies I don't think Google would accept that and just not delete it. The same is true for Google. If a user purges their cookies there shouldn't be any set afterwards. However... what's probably happening here is that the cookie is being deleted but then created again immediately afterwards because something in the user's browser is connected to a Google server and that makes a new cookie if it detects the old one has gone away. The message in the tweet is informing the user that will happen. Arguably that's a reasonably useful notification - it stops the user mistakenly believing purging their cookies will log them out. EDIT: Or, more likely, Google are actually storing the user's logged in state in localstorage or something, so clearing cookies won't log you out because there isn't a cookie.
  - ctavan 8y ago
    Agree, in the "Clear browsing data" there's a clear message. Fine. However in chrome://settings/siteData?search=cookies there's just a "Remove all" button which in fact doesn't remove all cookies. See: https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044517442993737729 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044517442993737729
    - sbspk5567 8y ago
      Forget about the ‘remove all’ button. Clicking the huge delete button with ‘trash’ icon that is supposed to delete the cookie one by one just hides the entry and then every Google Cookie is back when you refresh the page.
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
Are they trying to promote Firefox or something? Chrome seems to be trying quite hard to annoy people enough to actually uninstall it.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- smt88 8y ago
  Only a small fraction of Chrome's user base will notice, and not even all of those will care. There are likely tech-savvy people reading this on Chrome 69 right now.
  - diakritikal 8y ago
    Office of 20 here. Now almost everyone's in agreement that we'll move off Chrome. And we'll recommend our families and friends do the same. This is how Firefox (pre-bloat) gained traction at the expense of IE, and this is how chrome gained traction at the expense of Firefox/IE. And now this is how chrome's market share will decline as tech leaders, journalists and then the public find out how much of a privacy nightmare it really is.
    - phire 8y ago
      I'm slightly annoyed. I just made the commitment to move back to Linux from Windows 10 last week. I was hoping to at least stick with chromium, now I'm reconsidering that. Now that I think about it, should I really be trusting Android? Is iOS any better? Apple does appear to show some commitment to privacy, but their anti repair stance is crazy. Will I have to switch to custom Android ROM with all the Google services neutered?
      - akie 8y ago
        With regards to privacy I trust Apple more than Google, if only for the fact that their business doesn't operate on the principle of violating your privacy.
dannyw 8y ago
It’s time for antitrust action. This is just too excessive.
- jiveturkey 8y ago
  sorry, disagree. very very easy to switch browsers.
  - dannyw 8y ago
    We’re not talking about the case of individual users. If you have a monopoly position in one market, you cannot unfairly use it to give you an advantage in another market. Imagine if Google started delisting sites with Facebook Partner Network ads on them... The ease of switching is completely irrelevant.
sbspk5567 8y ago
I posted about this last month here and also in Google Chrome forums but no one seemed to care. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17853092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17853092
- EGreg 8y ago
  I find the behavior of HN’s community as a whole, and its effect on submissions and comment scores interesting. I wish there was a way to discuss it, in like a meta-HN. A few days ago I posted an article about how the EU proposes a new law that could give up to 6 years in jail for social media posts. A discussion got started but for some readon the post was immediately “flagged” and that put an end to all discussions and upvotes on it. Yours, I notice, was “dead” so probably flagged as well? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18051432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18051432
  - tinus_hn 8y ago
    Probably because the site you linked sucks. Also the 'discussion' was pretty disappointing, some whining about the site and some inflammatory trolling. By one and the same person.
- jwildeboer 8y ago
  I guess it’s a matter of timing. And simple, clear messages as a source.
- tumetab1 8y ago
  That link leads to me an empty page, is the URL correct?
  - Boulth 8y ago
    The submission is marked as [dead] you need to change your settings to see it (enable showdead).
    - laurent123456 8y ago
simula67 8y ago
Can Google cookies be deleted ? This seems to have gone too far
- sbspk5567 8y ago
  Nope, Even if you go to Settings -> cookies then delete the cookies one by one. The cookies just come back magically. I completely stopped using Chrome for this reason.
  - cpcallen 8y ago
    Wow, that is pretty shitty. Given the number of times over the years that I've had to wipe all Google cookies and site data to fix issues with offline mode in Google Docs, this does not bode well for being able to use Chrome successfully to access even Google's own services in future.
    - kmlx 8y ago
      yes, you can. google cookies are being rewritten until you logout. once out, you can remove the cookies. once you re-login, the cookies come back. basically they've added a step: logout before cookie removal.
- ctavan 8y ago
  They can: You have to sign out of your Google account. Afterwards you can delete the cookies in Chrome and they will actually be gone.
- oever 8y ago
  You can clean out ~/.config/chromium/ in a cron job or in a wrapper script around the chrom{e,ium} binary.
ToFab123 8y ago
That was it for me. I hit the uninstall button. Enough!
crb002 8y ago
Sounds like Chrome 69 really sucks. Would kick out of laptop for not deleting cookies.
- FerretFred 8y ago
  I agree, but running Chrome on a Chromebook is not so easy to avoid :(
- kmlx 8y ago
  i found that on my machines Chrome 69 is one of the fastest and consumes the least amount of ram of all Chrome releases so far. on mac the difference between firefox and chrome is night and day for both speed and memory consumption, unfortunately. even safari 12 fares better than firefox in this regard.
  - jamesb93 8y ago
    aer you saying chrome or ff uses less?
    - kmlx 8y ago
      chrome 69 on macos using latest 15 inch macbook. much faster than chrome 68, and in a different league than firefox 62. different story on windows thou.
nsajko 8y ago
Ha, this does not affect me personally, because of the way I use Chromium. Instead of calling it directly, I call a script which copies white-listed files and directories from the main Chromium data directory to a new data directory in /tmp, and then starts Chromium with the new data directory as data directory. After the directory in /tmp is deleted, there are sure to be no more cookies from that session.
- tinus_hn 8y ago
  Ha, this does not affect me personally, because of the way I do not use Chromium. Instead of calling it, I don't.
sveme 8y ago
Just got the update at work, and miraculously my uBlock adblocking extension was removed and DuckDuckGo as the default search engine replaced with Google. Looks like all my customizations were replaced by defaults. Now I'm wondering whether it was our IT's fault or due to Google actions.
- CodeWriter23 8y ago
  No IT staff in my shop. And the last 3 version upgrades have removed all my extensions, while trying to force the Google Drive extension on my installation. So the thing is, I’m heavily reliant on 1Password, and force uninstalling that extension has made Chrome useless to me. I refuse to reinstall my extensions again and I refuse to log in to Chrome to have my extensions synced. If they want to break my browser on autopilot, they can fuck off.
  - Sidnicious 8y ago
    This sounds like a bug. Could you please file it at https://crbug.com/new https://crbug.com/new?
    - CodeWriter23 8y ago
      Send me a check for my rate and I’ll do it.
- TomMarius 8y ago
  Happened to me as well (with no corporate IT around)
- beavis2 8y ago
  That didn't happen to me.
- antpls 8y ago
  I updated Chromium to version 69 on a personal debian 9.5, but it didn't touch any of my settings nor removed any installed extensions. I don't (and never did) log into Chromium with my Google account however, so no syncing is happening.
laurent123456 8y ago
The list of what's left after you "Clear all cookies": https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120 Even YouTube's stuff are left, that's crazy.
jagira 8y ago
Chrome 69 on Mac puts Close/Minimise/Maximise buttons in an additional bar when in fullscreen mode. It's super irritating to see an additional bar when you move mouse to top of screen. I have downgraded to Chrome 68 and disabled auto updates. https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/D0dB6jJ_Lwo;context-place=topicsearchin/chrome/category$3Agive-feature-feedback-and-suggestions%7Csort:relevance%7Cspell:false https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/D0dB6j...
- butz 8y ago
  Disabling updates is really bad idea. Maybe it is still possible to switch back to old functionality using chrome://flags ?
  - jagira 8y ago
    I tried looking for config options but couldn't find any. I am just a version behind. Will resume auto updates when they fix this annoying behaviour.
- ss64 8y ago
  wow that is super annoying, makes full screen unusable.
- medecau 8y ago
  Browsers run remote code locally. Disabling any browser's auto-update is one of the worst computer security ideas in 2018. Be a good netizen and reactivate those auto-updates or simply uninstall Chrome.
mangecoeur 8y ago
Seriously don't know why anyone is surprised that a browser built by an ad-tech company pushes the user tracking tech of that company. Just use Firefox and have done with it - there's been a series of these kinds of posts over the last couple of days with people suggesting insane workaround hacks instead of just changing their browser. P.S. if you keep chrome because some websites only work properly there, maybe y'all should follow standards at work instead of targeting a proprietary browser like its 2001/IE6 again.
- jhasse 8y ago
  It shows just how much better Chrome is on every other aspect.
  - Sharlin 8y ago
    There are really very few things Chrome is better at than Firefox these days.
    - raxxorrax 8y ago
      There are a number of things were Chrome is worse, actually.
      - sbr464 8y ago
        I do wish Web USB would be more supported in Firefox/safari etc. not sure why Chrome is so far in front there.
        vbernat 8y ago
        This is considered insecure. Firefox devs think that prompting the user for permission does not inform the user enough about the risk. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674718 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674718.
        8y ago
lwhi 8y ago
If an organisation gets to a certain size, is it inevitable that it will eventually turn bad and disregard it's end-users' interests? Is this just the nature of the beast?
- tyingq 8y ago
  "The goals of the advertising business model do not always correspond to providing quality search to users." http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html
- perfunctory 8y ago
  You are getting it backwards. Google regards its end-users interests alright. You are just misunderstanding who the end-users are.
  - lwhi 8y ago
    Clients vs. livestock maybe ..
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- tumetab1 8y ago
  Not evil, just less intelligent. In a small company every manager can weight more factors. As it gets bigger and specialization grows a manager must reduce what it considers to focus on more specific tasks. In a small company, a development manager can weight privacy concerns and use it judgment to change features. In a bigger company the development manager must delivery whatever it reaches him as a request, only the privacy department can make decisions regarding that.
mike22223333 8y ago
Everyone developing for the web platform should keep in mind if their business actually supports their competitor. Every time a user clears their cookies your site will be at a disadvantage if your business depends on ads or account login, not Google.
DarkWiiPlayer 8y ago
What about chromium? Can anybody confirm if it has the same problem? (I know it shouldn't, but come on, who trusts google?)
- turblety 8y ago
  It still does a lot of callbacks to Google. the solution here is definitely switch to Firefox, but if you're really stuck on Chrome you could try Ungoogled chrome [1]. [1] https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium
- dannyw 8y ago
  Yes, it does. Same behaviour on Chromium.
ssijak 8y ago
Coincidentaly I switched from Google services a week before this Chrome fiasco. I am happy with the switch for services, but was hard to accept laggy firefox ui on mac or safari without some plugins. This made it 100% easier.
- nindalf 8y ago
  > laggy firefox ui on mac Really? I've been using it for years and I haven't felt a problem. But this could be a bug, and it'd be a good idea to report it.
  - calv 8y ago
    It's really weird, it happens on my "new" 2016 MBP and a work machine. But I can't tell why I'm getting slowdowns.
  - ssijak 8y ago
    Closing or moving tabs is sometimes laggy
- jamesb93 8y ago
  Are you against using Safari? It really is great on Mac.
  - jiveturkey 8y ago
    yup. content blocking model is superior, third party cookie handling is superior (and leading the charge), sharing of tabs between devices is superior, reading list is awesome, yada yada. personally i’m still on chrome. i stay signed in all the time anyway. not deleting google cookies is a feature from my POV. when google throws up an anti ad blocker, that’s when i’ll defect.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
drawkbox 8y ago
Another confirmation that engineers and product developers are no longer in control at Google. Engineering and product first is how Google won the game initially, very easy to forget that when the money rolls in massively and the power structures move away from those driving forces. Microsoft already went through this engineering/product growth to bizdev/marketing control to stagnation and is already in the return to engineering/product first phase. Basically their own Ballmer era is what Google is entering. Bizdev + marketing are hugely important, but the products and engineering need to be the focus. It is much easier to bizdev and market a product and engineering led system/focus, though success through this is always forgotten when massive success comes around because engineering/research and development are hard to quantify and put metrics to which the power structures move away from. Let's hope there are factions of engineering/product focused people in Google that can gain back control.
- Nokinside 8y ago
  > Basically their own Ballmer era is what Google is entering. It was not just Ballmer. When Gates was in charge, the technology was never the priority. Gates understands the tech, but MS never worked trough technology towards their goals. They used their monopoly power and bought tech, almost never build it. MS products started to gradually improve after Gates stopped being the chief technology officer of the company.
- orcdork 8y ago
  That feels like whitewashing part of the blame that applies to engineers and product developers. We don't get to say "oh it's those pesky money people, how dare they", while drawing a salary from the same pockets.
  - 49531 8y ago
    That just feels like Stallman-esque "lifestyleism". It's okay to be critical of a system while living in and part of it.
  - radiorental 8y ago
    It's not a simple blame game. Whomever controls the product definition rules the roost. E.g. good luck trying to be a developer at Microsoft 10 years ago in Balmer's 'embrace, extend, extinguish' model That is to say, it's organisational dna that dictates who defines the product. Once the 'specs' have been written, hands are tied.
JepZ 8y ago
Somehow this reminds me of the time when Google started to unify their login experience (one login for all Google services). That was the time I started actively avoiding Google services, and I still do. This incident is a good reminder of why I do so.
observr9 8y ago
Chrome highlights page keyword search result locations on the scroll bar, making the process of going through them very convenient. Firefox doesn't, and I couldn't find an extension that replicates the feature without extra manual effort. Also, I find Firefox UI sluggish to use, relative to Chrome UI.
- zach43 8y ago
  Well, I think you’re paying for the better speed in chrome by sacrificing your privacy. Isn’t that how this all works? You consent to being tracked -> google gets money off of tracking you -> google can pay more engineers to work on chrome and make it faster -> you get more tied into chrome’s performance quirks and ecosystem -> google gets more money by tracking you -> and so on... If that sounds fair to you, then none of google’s actions should bother you (probably). But for me personally, I switched over to Firefox a long time ago when I noticed that chrome was becoming increasingly user-hostile in design.
  - jasonvorhe 8y ago
    That actually sounds alright to me. But then I have everything in Google Drive, use G-Suitr for everything, buy Pixel phones and Chromebooks.
    - zach43 8y ago
      Hmm this is actually quite interesting...I don’t know anyone IRL who has such deep integration with google services (apart from a few googlers of course). You seem to be exactly the kind of user that would benefit from chrome’s recent changes. Is there anything google could do that could make you move away from their services? I can’t imagine that any further anti-privacy actions by google would justify the cost of having to having to switch away from google’s platforms.
- juststeve 8y ago
  try FF nightly
whywhywhywhy 8y ago
Was using private browsing to log in to work gmail last night and found it really creepy how it remained logged in across private tabs. Thought the whole point of a private tab was to completely isolate a browsing session, now you can never be certain your Google credentials are not being shared in these private sessions or even contaminate my non-private sessions. Going to have to use another browser for my work sessions from now on.
- wincent 8y ago
  I think Incognito tabs have always been this way in Chrome for as long as I remember (all currently open ones share a session). If you close all of them, the next one you open will be a clean slate.
- beavis2 8y ago
  > it remained logged in across private tabs. If you mean "Incognito mode", then that's always happened. You need to close all tabs. Exactly the same for FireFox's private browsing.
  - ken 8y ago
    I don't use Chrome/Firefox but this surprises me, as well. The presence of a private browser window (anywhere) will prevent it from deleting cookies when you close this private browser window? That seems completely counterintuitive to me. When else, in any application, does the mere existence of an open, empty window completely change the behavior of a different window? Safari's private tabs are each completely independent.
    - topspin 8y ago
      > The presence of a private browser window (anywhere) will prevent it from deleting cookies when you close this private browser window? Yes. This is not new behavior. And yes, it frustrates people that assume each window is a separate incognito instance. It's not, and hasn't ever been.
    - Dylan16807 8y ago
wslh 8y ago
This is when Google starts to underestimate users and treat them as dumb zombies. It is their new game theory play: 1/ Start making people think you are super ethical (don't be evil) 2/ Gain traction 3/ Change rules and take advantage of inertia. People are lazy to change browsers.
- czechdeveloper 8y ago
  You will see that there will be exactly zero backlash outside of hacker news. They do not need their first adopters anymore.
  - jonbronson 8y ago
    There are already a number of media outlets picking up these stories, including gizmoto and business insider. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Just takes time to propagate outward.
cinquemb 8y ago
How long until version has the feature that when you install it loads a kernal driver such that when you close it, it runs in the background copying keystrokes and screen shots and uploading them? I'd love to hear how they'd sell that, maybe offering to pay for your internet connection?
- Ws32ok 8y ago
  Like Microsoft did with their windows 10 technical preview? Or like Microsoft still does with machines with handwriting / touchscreens? https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-touch-security-waitlist.dat,37828.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-touch-security-wai...
  - cinquemb 8y ago
    Yeah, its interesting to see these companies move in this direction, must tell you that their profit margins are tightening and therefore must provide more value by increasing their surveillance levels.
std_throwawayay 8y ago
I suspect that they use metrics for making decisions and the total number of users is growing. Those who understand and care for privacy are only a small portion of the user base and don't play a role in metrics. And if they play a role in metrics, they are probably accounted as leeches because they use google products but don't pay back because they block ads. Therefore a totally useless user base... maybe.
graycrow 8y ago
Yesterday I started moving to FastMail, today switched to Firefox, what tomorrow will bring? Btw, can someone recommend a good alternative to Google Maps API?
- fma 8y ago
  I switched to FF ~1 year ago because I found the performance to be better. But Google's trend is making me consider switching back to an iPhone...
  - addicted 8y ago
    I really want the Note 9 but am afraid to switch away from the iPhone because of Apple’s stance on privacy. If you had told me a few years ago that Google was the reason I wasn’t buying an Android phone I wouldn’t have believed you.
  - wakkaflokka 8y ago
    I'm in the same boat. Just switched away from Gmail and Chrome. Love my Pixel 2 XL for its astonishing camera, but very seriously considering a switch to the iPhone.
    - d3ckard 8y ago
      In this case, I can assure you that iPhone8Plus/iPhoneX and successors camera is freaking awesome. Awesome enough to make me start doing photos for pleasure.
- StephenAshmore 8y ago
  I've been using Mapbox for maps and their geocoding api.
emrex 8y ago
Stoped trusting google years ago, I switched from chrome to firefox and from google to duckduckgo.
krisgenre 8y ago
Even for someone who likes Google, this is insane.
arunitc 8y ago
I just switched to Edge and it looks great. One of the reasons I had used Chrome and had recommended all my customers to use Chrome was the ability to print to PDF, which Firefox did not have (not sure if it does now). Edge does and will be recommending all my clients to try out Egde.
- mike22223333 8y ago
  If only would Edge add support for installing PWA's directly from chrome, like me prompting users to install, it would be great.
  - magicbuzz 8y ago
    Edge needs to add display: contents support before I’d consider suggesting it to anyone.
- userbinator 8y ago
  the ability to print to PDF All browser have had the ability to do that, for many years now, if you install a PDF printer driver. Adobe was the first with a commercial one, but I'm sure there are free ones now.
  - froindt 8y ago
    No idea what GP's role is, but given corporate environments, installing a PDF printer driver isn't always a quick process. This is particularly true if they're working with customers from many different companies, each with their own IT considerations. Recommending Chrome is an easy enough way to get that functionality.
- jiveturkey 8y ago
  Thats’s the reason? So trivial to install pdfwriter, whatever it’s called.
- iicc 8y ago
  Windows 10 comes with the virtual printer "Microsoft Print to PDF". That will work with firefox and is probably what Edge is actually using.
singularity2001 8y ago
Is Google indictable (sueable) for that massive abuse under EU law?
panemcircensis 8y ago
But if you take the laptop outside, at full moon, and dance naked on the hillside around a fire, singing "SudOh how I want to be free, baby", you can overcome those settings. There is absolutely no reason to be enraged about the evil. There is even a tech-community valve installed, see instructions above.
plasma 8y ago
Brave browser (https://brave.com/ https://brave.com/) is privacy focused (built-in Tor Tabs, for example) and uses Chromium on the backend (with the Google parts stripped).
- mike22223333 8y ago
  It's ad replacement scheme is unethical. It forces publishers to only partner with them and not multiple competing companies, atleast with Chrome publishers can partner with other networks then Google. I won't root for it. We want competition.
pleasecalllater 8y ago
After all that I have some trust issues. Btw. how should I be sure that Chrome wouldn't copy my documents from my drive and send them to Google?
ravivyas 8y ago
I Uninstalled Chrome a few days ago, more due to the fact I don't need it. Safari has been my default for a long time, specially due to the fact I can use 1Blocker across the phone, iPad and my Mac. FF's Containers has replaced Chrome's profile features for me. Infact I have gone ahead and made a seperate container for Google and defaulted google domains to it, just like what the FaceBook container does.
- jdgoesmarching 8y ago
  I really wish I could be back on Safari to sync between all my devices. Pity they killed their Windows version, a lot of us don't have a choice of OS at work.
AndersSandvik 8y ago
This is where you can contact Google about this violation https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787 https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787
yAnonymous 8y ago
Considering how great Google are with regex, if your domain has anything Google in it, the cookies will probably be kept forever. http://www.google.com.somedomain.com http://www.google.com.somedomain.com Looks a lot like "google.com" to me.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
growt 8y ago
I'm counting the seconds to the google press release or blog post that says it was confusing for users that they were suddenly signed out of gmail after they deleted all cookies.
bhouston 8y ago
That is so bad. Oh my god.
kowdermeister 8y ago
It be some background process or chrome extension communicating with google services. Because that would explain the automatic regeneration of cookies since cookie creation is automatic. And no, even this won't stop me using Chrome. You know what will? If I can identify it's causing BSOD on my system, like I've seen 2 yesterday.
- foepys 8y ago
  BSOD can also be caused by bad graphics drivers. It's a major problem for browsers on Linux, so they don't enable hardware accelerated video playback by default. Firefox even used to remove the code from Linux builds but I think that they include it now.
  - kowdermeister 8y ago
    That's what I'm thinking as well, it happened during WebGL development with the same symptoms both time.
mic47 8y ago
Could this be only when you are logged-in to your account in chrome? I.e. "if you are logged-in to chrome, it won't delete google cookies because it need it for you to be logged-in to chrome (because of some UX excuse, like user confusion why it's logged-out from chrome). If you are logged out of chrome, it will delete everything." If it works this way, I would be willing to give them benefit of doubt, since there is reasonable UX reason to do it this way (given that logged-in to chrome now equals to logged-in to gmail). I personally would expect that deleting cookies will not log me out of chrome.
- IanSanders 8y ago
  This could have been a valid point, but not since they started automatically logging you in in the browser when you log in to gmail.
subtlefart 8y ago
What a cookie monster
kolderman 8y ago
Be as evil as possible.
vinyasmusic 8y ago
So it's doing a 69 with your privacy
giancarlostoro 8y ago
Wondering how long till the community forks Chromium and makes a foundation for a reasonable Chromium fork. I'm more of a Firefox kinda guy, but I mean it seems like the only way that users will regain control over their browser. I know Vivaldi is based off at least parts of Chromium but I don't think it's fully open source yet and it's not (at least last I checked) simple enough to install on Linux (I can't just apt-get install it effortlessly like I can Chromium for example).
mehrdadn 8y ago
Is there any reason to believe Google would not be tracking Chrome installations even without persistent cookies? Does this actually make any difference?
woranl 8y ago
Google, don’t underestimate the collective power of early adopters. We can put you up there, we can pull you down. Users are not dumb fucks.
sunseb 8y ago
It’s time to switch: duckduckgo.com qwant.com
- chrisper 8y ago
  Isn't Qwant the company that made some bad news recently?
- gregknicholson 8y ago
  Let's not perpetuate the idea that Google is primarily a web search engine. It hasn't been ever since Gmail, Google Calendar, Chrome and Android took off.
torgoguys 8y ago
Isn't this an unsurprising, logical consequence of "signing into google"=="signing into chrome"? If you're still signed into Chrome you're going to get those cookies recreated by Chrome immediately. Has anyone tested this behavior if you aren't signed in, or have disabled the google/chrome login equivalence?
- Brakenshire 8y ago
  Yes, seems like it’s pretty much a technical restatement of how "signing into google"=="signing into chrome" works. It is interesting to see it in this light, however. It’s easier to justify through UI (“It’s just one Google service logging in to another”) than it is when you look at it in a technical or historical light, of what being a browser used to mean.
- philipodonnell 8y ago
  Pretty clever. Sign into Google services on chrome, get Google cookies and get signed into chrome as a convenience. Clear cookies on chrome doesn't sign out of chrome. Signed into chrome and no cookies means you get Google cookies restored as a convenience. Everyone here is blaming marketing but somebody pretty technical came up with that.
- lotu 8y ago
  So this means if you want to clear all your cookies you have to sign out of Google? I really don't see what the big deal is it looks like the button is pretty darn clear about what it does and does not do, perhaps they could include a link to sign out of google as well?
8fingerlouie 8y ago
News like this, and the "forced" sign-in just illustrates to me how desperate Google has become to "own all your data". I lost all trust in public cloud after Snowden, but somehow remained convinced that yes, Google reads my email, but that's about it. I migrated everything but email to a selfhosted solution, and simplified things a lot. Recently i've also migrated mail away from Google. These past years have sadly proven (to me) i was right. What makes me even more sad is that the common user has very few options to avoid it. To the best of my knowledge, Apple doesn't track you, neither on Mac OS or iOS, but there's a steep price, one that most consumers are not ready to pay. Linux may be ready for the desktop, but it's still a long way away from my parents installing it.
8to5Therapy 8y ago
prbly 99% of ppl saying they're done with Google and Chrome on the comment are posting the same comment from Chrome
mojo74 8y ago
It seems to me that the recent cosmetic changes to Chrome were a sleight of hand. As many people have pointed out here, there has been a major shift in Google's attitude towards its users and the web as a whole. I think we are looking at the public face of something significant to have happened in Google search (and AI) and this attempt to start plugging all the gaps in our browsing habits is so that Google have as good as 95-100% understanding of human habits. Foil hats on everybody :)
Improvotter 8y ago
I wanna switch go Firefox so badly. But I use Linux, MacOS, and Windows and Firefox still does not support keychain on MacOS. I'm not gonna input my master password every time I open up my browser.
- TCattd 8y ago
  Or use a good cross-platform (Linux included) open-source password manager. For example: https://bitwarden.com https://bitwarden.com ;)
  - Improvotter 8y ago
    Does Firefox offer integration with this for the master password? How does this work exactly on iOS?
Navarr 8y ago
Why are we assuming maliciousness? My best guess that Chrome works this way would be due to combining the sign-in cookies with the general cookies of the browser (e.g. 1 cookie store instead of 2). So when you log in to Google, you log in to Chrome - and vice versa. For non-technical users this is a convenience feature, though for many it does come with privacy concerns. Judging by the comments re cookie clearing, there is some part of the login still separate from that, but as it re-establishes itself the cookies come back and you stay logged-in to Google. Is this perhaps preventable by having a "Guest" Chrome account? What happens then?
- latexr 8y ago
  > Why are we assuming maliciousness? Because Google has been screwing up so much, by this point they don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. > My best guess that Chrome works this way would be due to combining the sign-in cookies with the general cookies of the browser Why keep Youtube cookies, then? https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120
- n42 8y ago
  It is either malicious, or it is negligent. Either way it erodes trust significantly. Given the trend of changes in Chrome lately, if your alarm bells aren’t ringing yet, you are probably not paying attention. I have switched to Firefox and have used this as an opportunity to begin my transition away from GMail.
- CaptainZapp 8y ago
  Why are we assuming maliciousness? Because based on their history big tech companies (possibly with the exception of Apple) lost any benefits of a doubt. When they screw up like that I now assume that it's intentional and unless they run into a massive pr disaster or an EU fine of a couple billions they give exactly zero fucks about their users.
- neolefty 8y ago
  I agree — malicious would be to hide the Google cookies that are associated with your browser-level Google login. As it is, I think it's quite transparent. You get new cookies. It shows you their age. They're new. You're still logged into your Google account. Solution: Log out of your Google account.
swebs 8y ago
"Oh you want to take a moral stand? Ok, the door is that way. We've just successfully lobbied for a few hundred more H1B's that will do anything we tell them"
- adriancooney 8y ago
  For all we know this could have happened!
- jstanley 8y ago
  If the company is asking you to do things that you find ethically untenable, you should leave, even in full knowledge that the company will find a way to do it anyway.
  - mattferderer 8y ago
    You should first ask, can I & others change the company from within. Many people credit a small group of Microsoft employees for getting the company to embrace open source. This group grew from within as I'm told.
    - codethief 8y ago
      > Many people credit a small group of Microsoft employees for getting the company to embrace open source. This group grew from within as I'm told. I've been wondering how this transition came about. Do you have more information on that (e.g. an article or a blog post that you could refer me to)?
      - mattferderer 8y ago
        Just years of seeing them credited in random forums & social media sites. Quick Google Search: Credits Hanselman & Guthrie - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8596268 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8596268 AMA w/ Hanselman mentions it being 10 yrs ago - https://hashnode.com/ama/with-scott-hanselman-cjbx98jh506b34cwtk99ik5ep https://hashnode.com/ama/with-scott-hanselman-cjbx98jh506b34... This article might be exactly what you're looking for - https://thenewstack.io/microsoft-finally-came-around-open-source/ https://thenewstack.io/microsoft-finally-came-around-open-so...
dhimes 8y ago
I wonder if it's still going to wipe out my password storage...
- n42 8y ago
  1Password now has a browser extension that runs the entire application in browser, which means you can use a dedicated password manager across all operating systems with a proper security model. Check out the 1Password X extension.
ur-whale 8y ago
One thing that really surprises me with Google is how some of the old timers there (who very likely aren't constrained by the "I have o make a living" at this point) can still agree to continue working there when they witness what the culture has become.
alistproducer2 8y ago
Wow,more bad news on the privacy front for Chrome users. I hate to beat a dead horse, but I'm glad I switched back to FF. I'm absolutely loving the multi-account container feature.
Buetol 8y ago
Here's the PR where this message has been introduced: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/986287 https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/98... ...but the related bug discussion is hidden.... The internal name for the feature is "DICE" (desktop identity consistency feature) There is a build flag to disable the feature: ENABLE_DICE_SUPPORT
- class4behavior 8y ago
  Well, at least in chromium you can disable it at run time as well: chrome://flags/#account-consistency
  - OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago
    Not believable.
  - swsieber 8y ago
    IIRC that flag is broken in canary 71
arountheworld 8y ago
I can't help to think that this is conseqhence of GDPR, so that Google can now assert their power over other ad companies.
m-p-3 8y ago
Glad I switched back to Firefox when Quantum came out. Now I kinda hope Mozilla will make an official addon like Facebook Container but for Google services. We're being tracked too much, and it's time to fight back and making it easy to the average user to do it is the only way to change that. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-container/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-cont...
cimmanom 8y ago
Non-Twitter writeup: https://news.softpedia.com/news/chrome-69-does-not-delete-google-cookies-when-clearing-all-website-data-522884.shtml https://news.softpedia.com/news/chrome-69-does-not-delete-go...
cryptos 8y ago
Keep in mind that Google dropped the motto "Don't be evil." So this change is in compliance with Google ethics now.
- teddyfrozevelt 8y ago
  https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html No they didn't. It's right at the bottom here.
Tistel 8y ago
power corrupts, absolute ... yada yada ... cliches etc. I am trying to stick to duck duck go and a safari/firefox combo. The browsers are fine. But, its hard to give up that !g search. I worked in the ad-tech space in the past. Google's tech is amazing, but, the price we pay for all this free stuff ... scary/creepy.
nimbius 8y ago
not seeing it here, but its worth a mention for those ready to jump ship. Iridium https://iridiumbrowser.de/ https://iridiumbrowser.de/ is a fork of Chromium that seeks to deprecate the absurdities Google seems racing to introduce into chrome.
edibleEnergy 8y ago
Title of the post is not right, the author issued a (technically important) correction[1]: > Brief correction: Cookies seem to get removed and re-created immediately. At least the cookie content and creation date seems to change. Nonetheless: After hitting the "remove all" button you still don't end up with an empty cookie jar. [1]: https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044543955457773573 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044543955457773573
potench 8y ago
Waiting for APF’s response, she usually provides some insight, here’s an example from the recent Chrome Sign-in changes https://twitter.com/__apf__/status/1044109217903198210?s=21 https://twitter.com/__apf__/status/1044109217903198210?s=21
koolba 8y ago
So all cookies are equal, but some are more equal than others? Privacy implications aside, and boy are they some big ones, Google should be worried about this leading to accusations of abusing the monopoly power of their browser.
dfcowell 8y ago
Well, that was finally evil enough for me to switch from Chrome to Vivaldi. This is starting to look like early-00s Internet Explorer all over again, just with a different BigCorp behind the wheel. Still need to buy a few things to make self-hosting email and my personal site practical, but hopefully that'll all be set up in a few weeks as well. Bye Google.
OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago
'statistical probability of antitrust: zero, full speed ahead!'
Mikho 8y ago
Surprised about all the fuzz. The good part about Chrome is one may create many sessions/users in Chrome. So, I use one dedicated Chrome user to access Google services and use another not logged into Google user in a different session for everything else. There is really no problem if one knows how to use Chrome. Really good part is that it's possible to create a shortcut to a site/service from a particular user session in Chrome and launch that shortcut as a headless standalone window that looks like Windows native app, not a browser. The shortcut is connected to the user session it was created from. So, for example, I have Gmail icon on my desktop and taskbar that launches a dedicated window to access mail without even starting Chrome browser session for Google user. Simultaneously I have Chrome opened with another, not Google, user/session. Problem solved--check mail, calendar, whatever in one sandboxed environment and browse the web in another one.
captainmuon 8y ago
If the log-into chrome would just reflect the login state into google's services, I think it would be much less controversal and actually useful. Imagine little indicators that show which identity providers you are logged into, like Facebook, Google, Twitter, .... You could do this by passively reading the site cookies in an extension (are you allowed to do that nowadays in extensions?). Even better, if you are not logged into, say, Facebook, block third party cookies from their domains so it's harder for them to track you. I think I have a good idea for a weekend project...
wrs 8y ago
Inaccurate headline — according to later messages it does delete the Google cookies, but the auto sign in feature (discussed earlier) recreates them, as it obviously must. I don’t think an additional wave of hysterical dismay is justified here.
- mdavidn 8y ago
  “When you sign into Gmail, you also sign into Chrome.” How does this feature “obviously” imply that Chrome must recreate tracking cookies? My expetation would be that, after deleting all cookies, I’m signed into the browser but not Gmail.
neolefty 8y ago
Technically, it does remove the cookies. And then instantly you get new ones, from being logged in to your G account at the browser level.
- anticensor 8y ago
  This is worse than not removing them as your bandwith cap would drain.
qubax 8y ago
So "clear browsing history" ( from all time ) really doesn't do what it says anymore? It doesn't even clear youtube history? Wowsa. If google is this bad, I wonder what microsoft is really storing. I wonder what ISPs are storing. Also, this type of news doesn't give me much confidence when it comes to android either.
makecheck 8y ago
You have to be able to trust your tools. Imagine if “rm” just decided to occasionally set aside files instead of removing them. The “star” in “rm star” means “remove everything”, not “remove, asterisk” where at the bottom of the page the asterisk lists exceptions like some kind of marketing weasel. Sheesh.
- lann 8y ago
  `rm *` doesn't remove files starting with `.` (on most shells)...
tebruno99 8y ago
Chrome 69, the The Google Chrome that Sucks and F*&#s
peheje 8y ago
I'll take a look at Firefox.
contem 8y ago
I like to think that Google is just not a conventional company and that they do everything to not become one. They creatively solve challenges (like how to keep certain cookies when a user presses "remove all") and this helps them provide unbiased, accurate, and free access to the world's information. People wanting to stay signed in can rely on them to do the right thing, even if in the near term the financial returns are not obvious. Their corporate structure is aligned with this objectivity: Serving their end users is at the heart of what they do. When people are logged off you can't really consider them your number one priority, because they don't either. Many Silicon Valley companies are under pressure to keep their earnings in line with short-term analyst's forecasts, Google is no exception here. But forced and universal log-in to Google's services optimizes for long-term return. Everybody hoped, but nobody believed, that Google would end up in this powerful position: Being able to strong-arm your power users, while still providing the best, most accurate, search results for people not logged in. In the end, this business tactic of universal and forced log-in makes the world, and by extension the internet, a better place. I know some people here raise privacy concerns, but this change clearly protects a user's privacy.
davidf18 8y ago
We need disclosure laws. If the program no longer clears Google Cookies, the user should be warned when they clear cookies with Chrome that Google cookies are not cleared.
kerng 8y ago
I can't help to think that the new Google's CEO is not setting the right standards and values for the company. Google's been on a roll recently with privacy violations and related "doing evil" news. Someone on top must be encouraging it, or at least not hold people accountable.
reidrac 8y ago
I had to leave Firefox for Chrome at the office because Meet and Hangouts; I missed this: https://blog.mozilla.org/webrtc/firefox-is-now-supported-by-google-hangouts-and-meet/ https://blog.mozilla.org/webrtc/firefox-is-now-supported-by-... Since Firefox 60 you don't need Chrome for that, so I'm back to Firefox. Firefox isn't perfect, and that was OK because there was always Chrome. Now it starts to feel like it is Firefox or nothing, which isn't ideal.
thsealienbstrds 8y ago
It's like some people at Google realize that the company's image is messed up beyond repair. So they decided they might as well go full-on evil and make as much money as they can before the party's over.
_virtu 8y ago
Annnnnd I'm moving to brave.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
pertymcpert 8y ago
I've seen very few people questioning Pichai as Tim Cook gets questioned. Why does he get a free pass?
_zachs 8y ago
Just want to chime in here, if you're ok deciding that Google engineers should be quitting their jobs, you should be fine deleting any Google services you're still a part of.
samstave 8y ago
I'm beginning to think that all the craziness surrounding the Bad Things (TM) Chrome is doing, is being done surreptitiously as a warning from engineering in Google to GTFO... Given how google is embracing and building for totalitarian markets, such as China, as are its peers in the tech space - I think this is maybe a way to warn people to get the hell away from Google's products.
erkose 8y ago
Next up: Connecting to third party google ad sites that have been blocked by an addon that cancels a chrome.webRequest.onBeforeRequest.
lainproliant 8y ago
Goodbye Chrome.
tomxor 8y ago
OK that's enough, I had been doing a slow transition but this is just a step too far, qutebrowser is now my main browser... I just want a decent browser engine with a front-end that respects me, qute gets me chromium without the increasingly bullshit front end user "features".
csomar 8y ago
That does it for me. I have tried the latest FireFox version and it is faster, for the first time. I've been reluctant to switch but these last updates hit the nail everywhere. The tabs are worse. Chrome is slowish as hell and the intrusion is insane. Job well done chrome.
fixermark 8y ago
Updated tweets indicate it deletes the cookies then immediately creates new ones? This is probably related to that login-state sync between the browser and Google account previously discussed; it'd be really weird to me if deleting my cookies logged me out of my browser account, but that means it's also really weird if it logs me out of Gmail if I'm still in my Google account in the browser itself.
dbg31415 8y ago
Anyone have time to create a plugin mapping site? That was the only hangup I had to move over to Firefox. Most things work on Firefox, or there's a similar plugin. Still looking for a few: * Flix Assist - Chrome Web Store || https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/flix-assist/jeeccngbdajjccceabkpadjmbakhdbnp https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/flix-assist/jeeccn... * WhatFont - Chrome Web Store || https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/whatfont/jabopobgcpjmedljpbcaablpmlmfcogm https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/whatfont/jabopobgc... And... Lighthouse. A few of the plugins I used on Chrome don't quite have perfect matches... * Create Link - Chrome Web Store || https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/create-link/gcmghdmnkfdbncmnmlkkglmnnhagajbm https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/create-link/gcmghd... -- haven't found a Firefox addon that lets me copy URL + Title via keyboard shortcut. Also looking for a way to change Firefox's default Apple + Shift + 5 to not try and take a Firefox screenshot, as Apple + Shift + 5 is my Skitch shortcut.
mortehu 8y ago
If you want to delete all cookies and site data, go to the "All cookies and site data" page in settings (chrome://settings/siteData) and click delete all. This also deletes Google cookies. If you just want to browse without your existing cookies, I suggest opening a Guest Window. Just open the "Current User" menu and then "Open Guest window". That way you don't have to delete them at the end. This is assuming you're in good faith trying to delete cookies, and just can't figure out how.
CommanderData 8y ago
Remember when every developer was a advocate of Google Chrome? The outrage begins but only for .000001% of users. Google could not care less. I haven't switched like most people here say they have, I have made an effort to install alternatives and use them. A better way to protest is to begin supporting Firefox in other ways such as writing your web apps and extensions.
dzonga 8y ago
Firefox on Mac can kill the battery and be a performance hog so far simply disabling auto-update might solve, some cases if you use FirefoxDeveloperEdition.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
CitizenTekk 8y ago
But for an SEO like me, I will really get a hard time dropping google as it still control almost the powerful SERPFs in the net. Will still find better ways and start re-evaluating things as an alternative, anyone here with suggestion will be very much welcome and appreciated. cheeky moves. Might as well just use it doing business related things and use firefox as personal browser.
talonx 8y ago
I have been a Firefox user for years. I have realized that in spite of it being more open, it is absolutely necessary to keep up to date with what Mozilla is up to. E.g. came across this today - https://blog.ungleich.ch/en-us/cms/blog/2018/08/04/mozillas-new-dns-resolution-is-dangerous/ https://blog.ungleich.ch/en-us/cms/blog/2018/08/04/mozillas-...

2364 points by jwildeboer 8y ago

How has it been this long and no one pointed out the obvious joke here: Chrome 69 - Fucking users right in the face

I recommend that anyone that has a problem with this in Europe file a GDPR complaint, and if you're in the US file a complaint with your attorney general. Some states' attornies general are looking for new ways to come down on Google, and this is a good start. If you have a setting to delete all cookies and it doesn't do that, that's against the law in some places.

chii 8y ago
How can GDPR apply to processes running locally on your machine? At best, you can claim misleading advertising (which, is often handled by the fair trade commission or something similar, and often has to show damages before they can award anything).
- ctavan 8y ago
  I recommend this read: https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-case-study https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-ca...
  - czechdeveloper 8y ago
    Your url does not work for me (404), this one does: https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-case-study-on-the-example-of-chrome-browser-change/ https://blog.lukaszolejnik.com/am-i-logged-in-or-not-gdpr-ca...
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  GDPR can apply to personal data on a piece of paper. What matters is the data, and what is done with it. Does that cookie get read by Google? Of course, or there would be no point. Does it enhance their tracking? Most likely. Is there a GDPR compliant opt-out without loss of features? At first glance it seems not.
- tveita 8y ago
  They're tampering with the expected operation of the browser so that even after the user explicitly told them not to it still sends personally identifiable tracking information to their servers. I'm glad the GDPR is in effect, so instead of "this should be illegal" we can say "of course this is blatantly illegal". I hope they get a fine for this, with multipliers for how deliberate it is, and for keeping on defending the behaviour even after being called out.
buster 8y ago
I'd recommend supporting https://noyb.eu/ https://noyb.eu/ though.
zumbof 8y ago
I don't understand why something like that would be illegal under the GDPR. You are told when you wipe your cookies that Google cookies won't be deleted. Also your browser letting you wipe your cookies is not some kind of human right.
- DarkWiiPlayer 8y ago
  No it doesn't. Press Ctrl+Shift+Del and it takes you directly to a screen that lets you "delete cookies", which it apparently doesn't. What's surprising about that being illegal? They are literally lying to their users about their privacy.
  - zumbof 8y ago
    Just tried it on 69.0.3497.100 and all cookies were deleted and I was logged out from the browser. I also remember seeing a message "you will stay signed on to your Google account" but it seems to have disappeared (or maybe it only shows if you have sync enabled which I don't)
    - askmike 8y ago
      That's not the behavior we are arguing about here though.
craftyguy 8y ago
I'd recommend not using chrom{e,ium} instead. They might be 'forced' by a court to apply bandaids, but they'll just find some new area to exploit.
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  Not just that but also risk a big fine; "regular" GDPR violations (when warnings are ignored) can be tens of millions, anti-trust fines can be half a billion easily. The EU compensates for tax loopholes via big fines.
  - craftyguy 8y ago
    The best way to communicate "stop doing stupid shit" to google is not use their services/applications when they do stupid shit. Losing market share/customers is far more impactful than any (currently possible) fines.
    - Sharlin 8y ago
      Losing a few techies who care about things like this when Google has literally billions of users? This is exactly what governments are meant for.
    - simion314 8y ago
      It is still anti competitive, a browser that has special rules/code for the browser maker websites. Next they could give their own websites permissions that other websites don't have by default and that you could not remove(or need to find a convoluted way to remove), ex they could give google webpages permissions to access your webcam and microphone by default. This illegal things needs to be stopped it is not enough that only the people that understand it stop using Chrome.
      - marcusarmstrong 8y ago
        That has already been done with video auto play.
AndersSandvik 8y ago
You can do it here https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787 https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787

rajaganesh87 8y ago

I think this is required for my-activity to work - https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity

Drakim 8y ago
I really hope not, no way Google can just change the nature of cookies in their browser to suit one of their services, it's just too much.
onion2k 8y ago
If I build a service that needs a cookie to persist in the event of a user purging their cookies I don't think Google would accept that and just not delete it. The same is true for Google. If a user purges their cookies there shouldn't be any set afterwards. However... what's probably happening here is that the cookie is being deleted but then created again immediately afterwards because something in the user's browser is connected to a Google server and that makes a new cookie if it detects the old one has gone away. The message in the tweet is informing the user that will happen. Arguably that's a reasonably useful notification - it stops the user mistakenly believing purging their cookies will log them out. EDIT: Or, more likely, Google are actually storing the user's logged in state in localstorage or something, so clearing cookies won't log you out because there isn't a cookie.
- ctavan 8y ago
  Agree, in the "Clear browsing data" there's a clear message. Fine. However in chrome://settings/siteData?search=cookies there's just a "Remove all" button which in fact doesn't remove all cookies. See: https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044517442993737729 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044517442993737729
  - sbspk5567 8y ago
    Forget about the ‘remove all’ button. Clicking the huge delete button with ‘trash’ icon that is supposed to delete the cookie one by one just hides the entry and then every Google Cookie is back when you refresh the page.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

Are they trying to promote Firefox or something? Chrome seems to be trying quite hard to annoy people enough to actually uninstall it.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
smt88 8y ago
Only a small fraction of Chrome's user base will notice, and not even all of those will care. There are likely tech-savvy people reading this on Chrome 69 right now.
- diakritikal 8y ago
  Office of 20 here. Now almost everyone's in agreement that we'll move off Chrome. And we'll recommend our families and friends do the same. This is how Firefox (pre-bloat) gained traction at the expense of IE, and this is how chrome gained traction at the expense of Firefox/IE. And now this is how chrome's market share will decline as tech leaders, journalists and then the public find out how much of a privacy nightmare it really is.
  - phire 8y ago
    I'm slightly annoyed. I just made the commitment to move back to Linux from Windows 10 last week. I was hoping to at least stick with chromium, now I'm reconsidering that. Now that I think about it, should I really be trusting Android? Is iOS any better? Apple does appear to show some commitment to privacy, but their anti repair stance is crazy. Will I have to switch to custom Android ROM with all the Google services neutered?
    - akie 8y ago
      With regards to privacy I trust Apple more than Google, if only for the fact that their business doesn't operate on the principle of violating your privacy.

dannyw 8y ago

It’s time for antitrust action. This is just too excessive.

jiveturkey 8y ago
sorry, disagree. very very easy to switch browsers.
- dannyw 8y ago
  We’re not talking about the case of individual users. If you have a monopoly position in one market, you cannot unfairly use it to give you an advantage in another market. Imagine if Google started delisting sites with Facebook Partner Network ads on them... The ease of switching is completely irrelevant.

sbspk5567 8y ago

I posted about this last month here and also in Google Chrome forums but no one seemed to care. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17853092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17853092

EGreg 8y ago
I find the behavior of HN’s community as a whole, and its effect on submissions and comment scores interesting. I wish there was a way to discuss it, in like a meta-HN. A few days ago I posted an article about how the EU proposes a new law that could give up to 6 years in jail for social media posts. A discussion got started but for some readon the post was immediately “flagged” and that put an end to all discussions and upvotes on it. Yours, I notice, was “dead” so probably flagged as well? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18051432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18051432
- tinus_hn 8y ago
  Probably because the site you linked sucks. Also the 'discussion' was pretty disappointing, some whining about the site and some inflammatory trolling. By one and the same person.
jwildeboer 8y ago
I guess it’s a matter of timing. And simple, clear messages as a source.
tumetab1 8y ago
That link leads to me an empty page, is the URL correct?
- Boulth 8y ago
  The submission is marked as [dead] you need to change your settings to see it (enable showdead).
  - laurent123456 8y ago

simula67 8y ago

Can Google cookies be deleted ? This seems to have gone too far

sbspk5567 8y ago
Nope, Even if you go to Settings -> cookies then delete the cookies one by one. The cookies just come back magically. I completely stopped using Chrome for this reason.
- cpcallen 8y ago
  Wow, that is pretty shitty. Given the number of times over the years that I've had to wipe all Google cookies and site data to fix issues with offline mode in Google Docs, this does not bode well for being able to use Chrome successfully to access even Google's own services in future.
  - kmlx 8y ago
    yes, you can. google cookies are being rewritten until you logout. once out, you can remove the cookies. once you re-login, the cookies come back. basically they've added a step: logout before cookie removal.
ctavan 8y ago
They can: You have to sign out of your Google account. Afterwards you can delete the cookies in Chrome and they will actually be gone.
oever 8y ago
You can clean out ~/.config/chromium/ in a cron job or in a wrapper script around the chrom{e,ium} binary.

ToFab123 8y ago

That was it for me. I hit the uninstall button. Enough!

crb002 8y ago

Sounds like Chrome 69 really sucks. Would kick out of laptop for not deleting cookies.

FerretFred 8y ago
I agree, but running Chrome on a Chromebook is not so easy to avoid :(
kmlx 8y ago
i found that on my machines Chrome 69 is one of the fastest and consumes the least amount of ram of all Chrome releases so far. on mac the difference between firefox and chrome is night and day for both speed and memory consumption, unfortunately. even safari 12 fares better than firefox in this regard.
- jamesb93 8y ago
  aer you saying chrome or ff uses less?
  - kmlx 8y ago
    chrome 69 on macos using latest 15 inch macbook. much faster than chrome 68, and in a different league than firefox 62. different story on windows thou.

nsajko 8y ago

Ha, this does not affect me personally, because of the way I use Chromium. Instead of calling it directly, I call a script which copies white-listed files and directories from the main Chromium data directory to a new data directory in /tmp, and then starts Chromium with the new data directory as data directory. After the directory in /tmp is deleted, there are sure to be no more cookies from that session.

tinus_hn 8y ago
Ha, this does not affect me personally, because of the way I do not use Chromium. Instead of calling it, I don't.

sveme 8y ago

Just got the update at work, and miraculously my uBlock adblocking extension was removed and DuckDuckGo as the default search engine replaced with Google. Looks like all my customizations were replaced by defaults. Now I'm wondering whether it was our IT's fault or due to Google actions.

CodeWriter23 8y ago
No IT staff in my shop. And the last 3 version upgrades have removed all my extensions, while trying to force the Google Drive extension on my installation. So the thing is, I’m heavily reliant on 1Password, and force uninstalling that extension has made Chrome useless to me. I refuse to reinstall my extensions again and I refuse to log in to Chrome to have my extensions synced. If they want to break my browser on autopilot, they can fuck off.
- Sidnicious 8y ago
  This sounds like a bug. Could you please file it at https://crbug.com/new https://crbug.com/new?
  - CodeWriter23 8y ago
    Send me a check for my rate and I’ll do it.
TomMarius 8y ago
Happened to me as well (with no corporate IT around)
beavis2 8y ago
That didn't happen to me.
antpls 8y ago
I updated Chromium to version 69 on a personal debian 9.5, but it didn't touch any of my settings nor removed any installed extensions. I don't (and never did) log into Chromium with my Google account however, so no syncing is happening.

laurent123456 8y ago

The list of what's left after you "Clear all cookies": https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120 Even YouTube's stuff are left, that's crazy.

jagira 8y ago

Chrome 69 on Mac puts Close/Minimise/Maximise buttons in an additional bar when in fullscreen mode. It's super irritating to see an additional bar when you move mouse to top of screen. I have downgraded to Chrome 68 and disabled auto updates. https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/D0dB6jJ_Lwo;context-place=topicsearchin/chrome/category$3Agive-feature-feedback-and-suggestions%7Csort:relevance%7Cspell:false https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/D0dB6j...

butz 8y ago
Disabling updates is really bad idea. Maybe it is still possible to switch back to old functionality using chrome://flags ?
- jagira 8y ago
  I tried looking for config options but couldn't find any. I am just a version behind. Will resume auto updates when they fix this annoying behaviour.
ss64 8y ago
wow that is super annoying, makes full screen unusable.
medecau 8y ago
Browsers run remote code locally. Disabling any browser's auto-update is one of the worst computer security ideas in 2018. Be a good netizen and reactivate those auto-updates or simply uninstall Chrome.

mangecoeur 8y ago

Seriously don't know why anyone is surprised that a browser built by an ad-tech company pushes the user tracking tech of that company. Just use Firefox and have done with it - there's been a series of these kinds of posts over the last couple of days with people suggesting insane workaround hacks instead of just changing their browser. P.S. if you keep chrome because some websites only work properly there, maybe y'all should follow standards at work instead of targeting a proprietary browser like its 2001/IE6 again.

jhasse 8y ago
It shows just how much better Chrome is on every other aspect.
- Sharlin 8y ago
  There are really very few things Chrome is better at than Firefox these days.
  - raxxorrax 8y ago
    There are a number of things were Chrome is worse, actually.
    - sbr464 8y ago
      I do wish Web USB would be more supported in Firefox/safari etc. not sure why Chrome is so far in front there.
      - vbernat 8y ago
        This is considered insecure. Firefox devs think that prompting the user for permission does not inform the user enough about the risk. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674718 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674718.
        8y ago

lwhi 8y ago

If an organisation gets to a certain size, is it inevitable that it will eventually turn bad and disregard it's end-users' interests? Is this just the nature of the beast?

tyingq 8y ago
"The goals of the advertising business model do not always correspond to providing quality search to users." http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html
perfunctory 8y ago
You are getting it backwards. Google regards its end-users interests alright. You are just misunderstanding who the end-users are.
- lwhi 8y ago
  Clients vs. livestock maybe ..
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
tumetab1 8y ago
Not evil, just less intelligent. In a small company every manager can weight more factors. As it gets bigger and specialization grows a manager must reduce what it considers to focus on more specific tasks. In a small company, a development manager can weight privacy concerns and use it judgment to change features. In a bigger company the development manager must delivery whatever it reaches him as a request, only the privacy department can make decisions regarding that.

mike22223333 8y ago

Everyone developing for the web platform should keep in mind if their business actually supports their competitor. Every time a user clears their cookies your site will be at a disadvantage if your business depends on ads or account login, not Google.

DarkWiiPlayer 8y ago

What about chromium? Can anybody confirm if it has the same problem? (I know it shouldn't, but come on, who trusts google?)

turblety 8y ago
It still does a lot of callbacks to Google. the solution here is definitely switch to Firefox, but if you're really stuck on Chrome you could try Ungoogled chrome [1]. [1] https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium
dannyw 8y ago
Yes, it does. Same behaviour on Chromium.

ssijak 8y ago

Coincidentaly I switched from Google services a week before this Chrome fiasco. I am happy with the switch for services, but was hard to accept laggy firefox ui on mac or safari without some plugins. This made it 100% easier.

nindalf 8y ago
> laggy firefox ui on mac Really? I've been using it for years and I haven't felt a problem. But this could be a bug, and it'd be a good idea to report it.
- calv 8y ago
  It's really weird, it happens on my "new" 2016 MBP and a work machine. But I can't tell why I'm getting slowdowns.
- ssijak 8y ago
  Closing or moving tabs is sometimes laggy
jamesb93 8y ago
Are you against using Safari? It really is great on Mac.
- jiveturkey 8y ago
  yup. content blocking model is superior, third party cookie handling is superior (and leading the charge), sharing of tabs between devices is superior, reading list is awesome, yada yada. personally i’m still on chrome. i stay signed in all the time anyway. not deleting google cookies is a feature from my POV. when google throws up an anti ad blocker, that’s when i’ll defect.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

drawkbox 8y ago

Another confirmation that engineers and product developers are no longer in control at Google. Engineering and product first is how Google won the game initially, very easy to forget that when the money rolls in massively and the power structures move away from those driving forces. Microsoft already went through this engineering/product growth to bizdev/marketing control to stagnation and is already in the return to engineering/product first phase. Basically their own Ballmer era is what Google is entering. Bizdev + marketing are hugely important, but the products and engineering need to be the focus. It is much easier to bizdev and market a product and engineering led system/focus, though success through this is always forgotten when massive success comes around because engineering/research and development are hard to quantify and put metrics to which the power structures move away from. Let's hope there are factions of engineering/product focused people in Google that can gain back control.

Nokinside 8y ago
> Basically their own Ballmer era is what Google is entering. It was not just Ballmer. When Gates was in charge, the technology was never the priority. Gates understands the tech, but MS never worked trough technology towards their goals. They used their monopoly power and bought tech, almost never build it. MS products started to gradually improve after Gates stopped being the chief technology officer of the company.
orcdork 8y ago
That feels like whitewashing part of the blame that applies to engineers and product developers. We don't get to say "oh it's those pesky money people, how dare they", while drawing a salary from the same pockets.
- 49531 8y ago
  That just feels like Stallman-esque "lifestyleism". It's okay to be critical of a system while living in and part of it.
- radiorental 8y ago
  It's not a simple blame game. Whomever controls the product definition rules the roost. E.g. good luck trying to be a developer at Microsoft 10 years ago in Balmer's 'embrace, extend, extinguish' model That is to say, it's organisational dna that dictates who defines the product. Once the 'specs' have been written, hands are tied.

JepZ 8y ago

Somehow this reminds me of the time when Google started to unify their login experience (one login for all Google services). That was the time I started actively avoiding Google services, and I still do. This incident is a good reminder of why I do so.

observr9 8y ago

Chrome highlights page keyword search result locations on the scroll bar, making the process of going through them very convenient. Firefox doesn't, and I couldn't find an extension that replicates the feature without extra manual effort. Also, I find Firefox UI sluggish to use, relative to Chrome UI.

zach43 8y ago
Well, I think you’re paying for the better speed in chrome by sacrificing your privacy. Isn’t that how this all works? You consent to being tracked -> google gets money off of tracking you -> google can pay more engineers to work on chrome and make it faster -> you get more tied into chrome’s performance quirks and ecosystem -> google gets more money by tracking you -> and so on... If that sounds fair to you, then none of google’s actions should bother you (probably). But for me personally, I switched over to Firefox a long time ago when I noticed that chrome was becoming increasingly user-hostile in design.
- jasonvorhe 8y ago
  That actually sounds alright to me. But then I have everything in Google Drive, use G-Suitr for everything, buy Pixel phones and Chromebooks.
  - zach43 8y ago
    Hmm this is actually quite interesting...I don’t know anyone IRL who has such deep integration with google services (apart from a few googlers of course). You seem to be exactly the kind of user that would benefit from chrome’s recent changes. Is there anything google could do that could make you move away from their services? I can’t imagine that any further anti-privacy actions by google would justify the cost of having to having to switch away from google’s platforms.
juststeve 8y ago
try FF nightly

whywhywhywhy 8y ago

Was using private browsing to log in to work gmail last night and found it really creepy how it remained logged in across private tabs. Thought the whole point of a private tab was to completely isolate a browsing session, now you can never be certain your Google credentials are not being shared in these private sessions or even contaminate my non-private sessions. Going to have to use another browser for my work sessions from now on.

wincent 8y ago
I think Incognito tabs have always been this way in Chrome for as long as I remember (all currently open ones share a session). If you close all of them, the next one you open will be a clean slate.
beavis2 8y ago
> it remained logged in across private tabs. If you mean "Incognito mode", then that's always happened. You need to close all tabs. Exactly the same for FireFox's private browsing.
- ken 8y ago
  I don't use Chrome/Firefox but this surprises me, as well. The presence of a private browser window (anywhere) will prevent it from deleting cookies when you close this private browser window? That seems completely counterintuitive to me. When else, in any application, does the mere existence of an open, empty window completely change the behavior of a different window? Safari's private tabs are each completely independent.
  - topspin 8y ago
    > The presence of a private browser window (anywhere) will prevent it from deleting cookies when you close this private browser window? Yes. This is not new behavior. And yes, it frustrates people that assume each window is a separate incognito instance. It's not, and hasn't ever been.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago

wslh 8y ago

This is when Google starts to underestimate users and treat them as dumb zombies. It is their new game theory play: 1/ Start making people think you are super ethical (don't be evil) 2/ Gain traction 3/ Change rules and take advantage of inertia. People are lazy to change browsers.

czechdeveloper 8y ago
You will see that there will be exactly zero backlash outside of hacker news. They do not need their first adopters anymore.
- jonbronson 8y ago
  There are already a number of media outlets picking up these stories, including gizmoto and business insider. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Just takes time to propagate outward.

cinquemb 8y ago

How long until version has the feature that when you install it loads a kernal driver such that when you close it, it runs in the background copying keystrokes and screen shots and uploading them? I'd love to hear how they'd sell that, maybe offering to pay for your internet connection?

Ws32ok 8y ago
Like Microsoft did with their windows 10 technical preview? Or like Microsoft still does with machines with handwriting / touchscreens? https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-touch-security-waitlist.dat,37828.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-touch-security-wai...
- cinquemb 8y ago
  Yeah, its interesting to see these companies move in this direction, must tell you that their profit margins are tightening and therefore must provide more value by increasing their surveillance levels.

std_throwawayay 8y ago

I suspect that they use metrics for making decisions and the total number of users is growing. Those who understand and care for privacy are only a small portion of the user base and don't play a role in metrics. And if they play a role in metrics, they are probably accounted as leeches because they use google products but don't pay back because they block ads. Therefore a totally useless user base... maybe.

graycrow 8y ago

Yesterday I started moving to FastMail, today switched to Firefox, what tomorrow will bring? Btw, can someone recommend a good alternative to Google Maps API?

fma 8y ago
I switched to FF ~1 year ago because I found the performance to be better. But Google's trend is making me consider switching back to an iPhone...
- addicted 8y ago
  I really want the Note 9 but am afraid to switch away from the iPhone because of Apple’s stance on privacy. If you had told me a few years ago that Google was the reason I wasn’t buying an Android phone I wouldn’t have believed you.
- wakkaflokka 8y ago
  I'm in the same boat. Just switched away from Gmail and Chrome. Love my Pixel 2 XL for its astonishing camera, but very seriously considering a switch to the iPhone.
  - d3ckard 8y ago
    In this case, I can assure you that iPhone8Plus/iPhoneX and successors camera is freaking awesome. Awesome enough to make me start doing photos for pleasure.
StephenAshmore 8y ago
I've been using Mapbox for maps and their geocoding api.

emrex 8y ago

Stoped trusting google years ago, I switched from chrome to firefox and from google to duckduckgo.

krisgenre 8y ago

Even for someone who likes Google, this is insane.

arunitc 8y ago

I just switched to Edge and it looks great. One of the reasons I had used Chrome and had recommended all my customers to use Chrome was the ability to print to PDF, which Firefox did not have (not sure if it does now). Edge does and will be recommending all my clients to try out Egde.

mike22223333 8y ago
If only would Edge add support for installing PWA's directly from chrome, like me prompting users to install, it would be great.
- magicbuzz 8y ago
  Edge needs to add display: contents support before I’d consider suggesting it to anyone.
userbinator 8y ago
the ability to print to PDF All browser have had the ability to do that, for many years now, if you install a PDF printer driver. Adobe was the first with a commercial one, but I'm sure there are free ones now.
- froindt 8y ago
  No idea what GP's role is, but given corporate environments, installing a PDF printer driver isn't always a quick process. This is particularly true if they're working with customers from many different companies, each with their own IT considerations. Recommending Chrome is an easy enough way to get that functionality.
jiveturkey 8y ago
Thats’s the reason? So trivial to install pdfwriter, whatever it’s called.
iicc 8y ago
Windows 10 comes with the virtual printer "Microsoft Print to PDF". That will work with firefox and is probably what Edge is actually using.

singularity2001 8y ago

Is Google indictable (sueable) for that massive abuse under EU law?

panemcircensis 8y ago

But if you take the laptop outside, at full moon, and dance naked on the hillside around a fire, singing "SudOh how I want to be free, baby", you can overcome those settings. There is absolutely no reason to be enraged about the evil. There is even a tech-community valve installed, see instructions above.

plasma 8y ago

Brave browser (https://brave.com/ https://brave.com/) is privacy focused (built-in Tor Tabs, for example) and uses Chromium on the backend (with the Google parts stripped).

mike22223333 8y ago
It's ad replacement scheme is unethical. It forces publishers to only partner with them and not multiple competing companies, atleast with Chrome publishers can partner with other networks then Google. I won't root for it. We want competition.

pleasecalllater 8y ago

After all that I have some trust issues. Btw. how should I be sure that Chrome wouldn't copy my documents from my drive and send them to Google?

ravivyas 8y ago

I Uninstalled Chrome a few days ago, more due to the fact I don't need it. Safari has been my default for a long time, specially due to the fact I can use 1Blocker across the phone, iPad and my Mac. FF's Containers has replaced Chrome's profile features for me. Infact I have gone ahead and made a seperate container for Google and defaulted google domains to it, just like what the FaceBook container does.

jdgoesmarching 8y ago
I really wish I could be back on Safari to sync between all my devices. Pity they killed their Windows version, a lot of us don't have a choice of OS at work.

AndersSandvik 8y ago

This is where you can contact Google about this violation https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787 https://support.google.com/policies/troubleshooter/7575787

yAnonymous 8y ago

Considering how great Google are with regex, if your domain has anything Google in it, the cookies will probably be kept forever. http://www.google.com.somedomain.com http://www.google.com.somedomain.com Looks a lot like "google.com" to me.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

growt 8y ago

I'm counting the seconds to the google press release or blog post that says it was confusing for users that they were suddenly signed out of gmail after they deleted all cookies.

bhouston 8y ago

That is so bad. Oh my god.

kowdermeister 8y ago

It be some background process or chrome extension communicating with google services. Because that would explain the automatic regeneration of cookies since cookie creation is automatic. And no, even this won't stop me using Chrome. You know what will? If I can identify it's causing BSOD on my system, like I've seen 2 yesterday.

foepys 8y ago
BSOD can also be caused by bad graphics drivers. It's a major problem for browsers on Linux, so they don't enable hardware accelerated video playback by default. Firefox even used to remove the code from Linux builds but I think that they include it now.
- kowdermeister 8y ago
  That's what I'm thinking as well, it happened during WebGL development with the same symptoms both time.

mic47 8y ago

Could this be only when you are logged-in to your account in chrome? I.e. "if you are logged-in to chrome, it won't delete google cookies because it need it for you to be logged-in to chrome (because of some UX excuse, like user confusion why it's logged-out from chrome). If you are logged out of chrome, it will delete everything." If it works this way, I would be willing to give them benefit of doubt, since there is reasonable UX reason to do it this way (given that logged-in to chrome now equals to logged-in to gmail). I personally would expect that deleting cookies will not log me out of chrome.

IanSanders 8y ago
This could have been a valid point, but not since they started automatically logging you in in the browser when you log in to gmail.

subtlefart 8y ago

What a cookie monster

kolderman 8y ago

Be as evil as possible.

vinyasmusic 8y ago

So it's doing a 69 with your privacy

giancarlostoro 8y ago

Wondering how long till the community forks Chromium and makes a foundation for a reasonable Chromium fork. I'm more of a Firefox kinda guy, but I mean it seems like the only way that users will regain control over their browser. I know Vivaldi is based off at least parts of Chromium but I don't think it's fully open source yet and it's not (at least last I checked) simple enough to install on Linux (I can't just apt-get install it effortlessly like I can Chromium for example).

mehrdadn 8y ago

Is there any reason to believe Google would not be tracking Chrome installations even without persistent cookies? Does this actually make any difference?

woranl 8y ago

Google, don’t underestimate the collective power of early adopters. We can put you up there, we can pull you down. Users are not dumb fucks.

sunseb 8y ago

It’s time to switch: duckduckgo.com qwant.com

chrisper 8y ago
Isn't Qwant the company that made some bad news recently?
gregknicholson 8y ago
Let's not perpetuate the idea that Google is primarily a web search engine. It hasn't been ever since Gmail, Google Calendar, Chrome and Android took off.

torgoguys 8y ago

Isn't this an unsurprising, logical consequence of "signing into google"=="signing into chrome"? If you're still signed into Chrome you're going to get those cookies recreated by Chrome immediately. Has anyone tested this behavior if you aren't signed in, or have disabled the google/chrome login equivalence?

Brakenshire 8y ago
Yes, seems like it’s pretty much a technical restatement of how "signing into google"=="signing into chrome" works. It is interesting to see it in this light, however. It’s easier to justify through UI (“It’s just one Google service logging in to another”) than it is when you look at it in a technical or historical light, of what being a browser used to mean.
philipodonnell 8y ago
Pretty clever. Sign into Google services on chrome, get Google cookies and get signed into chrome as a convenience. Clear cookies on chrome doesn't sign out of chrome. Signed into chrome and no cookies means you get Google cookies restored as a convenience. Everyone here is blaming marketing but somebody pretty technical came up with that.
lotu 8y ago
So this means if you want to clear all your cookies you have to sign out of Google? I really don't see what the big deal is it looks like the button is pretty darn clear about what it does and does not do, perhaps they could include a link to sign out of google as well?

8fingerlouie 8y ago

News like this, and the "forced" sign-in just illustrates to me how desperate Google has become to "own all your data". I lost all trust in public cloud after Snowden, but somehow remained convinced that yes, Google reads my email, but that's about it. I migrated everything but email to a selfhosted solution, and simplified things a lot. Recently i've also migrated mail away from Google. These past years have sadly proven (to me) i was right. What makes me even more sad is that the common user has very few options to avoid it. To the best of my knowledge, Apple doesn't track you, neither on Mac OS or iOS, but there's a steep price, one that most consumers are not ready to pay. Linux may be ready for the desktop, but it's still a long way away from my parents installing it.

8to5Therapy 8y ago

prbly 99% of ppl saying they're done with Google and Chrome on the comment are posting the same comment from Chrome

mojo74 8y ago

It seems to me that the recent cosmetic changes to Chrome were a sleight of hand. As many people have pointed out here, there has been a major shift in Google's attitude towards its users and the web as a whole. I think we are looking at the public face of something significant to have happened in Google search (and AI) and this attempt to start plugging all the gaps in our browsing habits is so that Google have as good as 95-100% understanding of human habits. Foil hats on everybody :)

Improvotter 8y ago

I wanna switch go Firefox so badly. But I use Linux, MacOS, and Windows and Firefox still does not support keychain on MacOS. I'm not gonna input my master password every time I open up my browser.

TCattd 8y ago
Or use a good cross-platform (Linux included) open-source password manager. For example: https://bitwarden.com https://bitwarden.com ;)
- Improvotter 8y ago
  Does Firefox offer integration with this for the master password? How does this work exactly on iOS?

Navarr 8y ago

Why are we assuming maliciousness? My best guess that Chrome works this way would be due to combining the sign-in cookies with the general cookies of the browser (e.g. 1 cookie store instead of 2). So when you log in to Google, you log in to Chrome - and vice versa. For non-technical users this is a convenience feature, though for many it does come with privacy concerns. Judging by the comments re cookie clearing, there is some part of the login still separate from that, but as it re-establishes itself the cookies come back and you stay logged-in to Google. Is this perhaps preventable by having a "Guest" Chrome account? What happens then?

latexr 8y ago
> Why are we assuming maliciousness? Because Google has been screwing up so much, by this point they don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. > My best guess that Chrome works this way would be due to combining the sign-in cookies with the general cookies of the browser Why keep Youtube cookies, then? https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044286636991877120
n42 8y ago
It is either malicious, or it is negligent. Either way it erodes trust significantly. Given the trend of changes in Chrome lately, if your alarm bells aren’t ringing yet, you are probably not paying attention. I have switched to Firefox and have used this as an opportunity to begin my transition away from GMail.
CaptainZapp 8y ago
Why are we assuming maliciousness? Because based on their history big tech companies (possibly with the exception of Apple) lost any benefits of a doubt. When they screw up like that I now assume that it's intentional and unless they run into a massive pr disaster or an EU fine of a couple billions they give exactly zero fucks about their users.
neolefty 8y ago
I agree — malicious would be to hide the Google cookies that are associated with your browser-level Google login. As it is, I think it's quite transparent. You get new cookies. It shows you their age. They're new. You're still logged into your Google account. Solution: Log out of your Google account.

swebs 8y ago

"Oh you want to take a moral stand? Ok, the door is that way. We've just successfully lobbied for a few hundred more H1B's that will do anything we tell them"

adriancooney 8y ago
For all we know this could have happened!
jstanley 8y ago
If the company is asking you to do things that you find ethically untenable, you should leave, even in full knowledge that the company will find a way to do it anyway.
- mattferderer 8y ago
  You should first ask, can I & others change the company from within. Many people credit a small group of Microsoft employees for getting the company to embrace open source. This group grew from within as I'm told.
  - codethief 8y ago
    > Many people credit a small group of Microsoft employees for getting the company to embrace open source. This group grew from within as I'm told. I've been wondering how this transition came about. Do you have more information on that (e.g. an article or a blog post that you could refer me to)?
    - mattferderer 8y ago
      Just years of seeing them credited in random forums & social media sites. Quick Google Search: Credits Hanselman & Guthrie - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8596268 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8596268 AMA w/ Hanselman mentions it being 10 yrs ago - https://hashnode.com/ama/with-scott-hanselman-cjbx98jh506b34cwtk99ik5ep https://hashnode.com/ama/with-scott-hanselman-cjbx98jh506b34... This article might be exactly what you're looking for - https://thenewstack.io/microsoft-finally-came-around-open-source/ https://thenewstack.io/microsoft-finally-came-around-open-so...

dhimes 8y ago

I wonder if it's still going to wipe out my password storage...

n42 8y ago
1Password now has a browser extension that runs the entire application in browser, which means you can use a dedicated password manager across all operating systems with a proper security model. Check out the 1Password X extension.

ur-whale 8y ago

One thing that really surprises me with Google is how some of the old timers there (who very likely aren't constrained by the "I have o make a living" at this point) can still agree to continue working there when they witness what the culture has become.

alistproducer2 8y ago

Wow,more bad news on the privacy front for Chrome users. I hate to beat a dead horse, but I'm glad I switched back to FF. I'm absolutely loving the multi-account container feature.

Buetol 8y ago

Here's the PR where this message has been introduced: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/986287 https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/98... ...but the related bug discussion is hidden.... The internal name for the feature is "DICE" (desktop identity consistency feature) There is a build flag to disable the feature: ENABLE_DICE_SUPPORT

class4behavior 8y ago
Well, at least in chromium you can disable it at run time as well: chrome://flags/#account-consistency
- OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago
  Not believable.
- swsieber 8y ago
  IIRC that flag is broken in canary 71

arountheworld 8y ago

I can't help to think that this is conseqhence of GDPR, so that Google can now assert their power over other ad companies.

m-p-3 8y ago

Glad I switched back to Firefox when Quantum came out. Now I kinda hope Mozilla will make an official addon like Facebook Container but for Google services. We're being tracked too much, and it's time to fight back and making it easy to the average user to do it is the only way to change that. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-container/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/facebook-cont...

cimmanom 8y ago

Non-Twitter writeup: https://news.softpedia.com/news/chrome-69-does-not-delete-google-cookies-when-clearing-all-website-data-522884.shtml https://news.softpedia.com/news/chrome-69-does-not-delete-go...

cryptos 8y ago

Keep in mind that Google dropped the motto "Don't be evil." So this change is in compliance with Google ethics now.

teddyfrozevelt 8y ago
https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html No they didn't. It's right at the bottom here.

Tistel 8y ago

power corrupts, absolute ... yada yada ... cliches etc. I am trying to stick to duck duck go and a safari/firefox combo. The browsers are fine. But, its hard to give up that !g search. I worked in the ad-tech space in the past. Google's tech is amazing, but, the price we pay for all this free stuff ... scary/creepy.

nimbius 8y ago

not seeing it here, but its worth a mention for those ready to jump ship. Iridium https://iridiumbrowser.de/ https://iridiumbrowser.de/ is a fork of Chromium that seeks to deprecate the absurdities Google seems racing to introduce into chrome.

edibleEnergy 8y ago

Title of the post is not right, the author issued a (technically important) correction[1]: > Brief correction: Cookies seem to get removed and re-created immediately. At least the cookie content and creation date seems to change. Nonetheless: After hitting the "remove all" button you still don't end up with an empty cookie jar. [1]: https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044543955457773573 https://twitter.com/ctavan/status/1044543955457773573

potench 8y ago

Waiting for APF’s response, she usually provides some insight, here’s an example from the recent Chrome Sign-in changes https://twitter.com/__apf__/status/1044109217903198210?s=21 https://twitter.com/__apf__/status/1044109217903198210?s=21

koolba 8y ago

So all cookies are equal, but some are more equal than others? Privacy implications aside, and boy are they some big ones, Google should be worried about this leading to accusations of abusing the monopoly power of their browser.

dfcowell 8y ago

Well, that was finally evil enough for me to switch from Chrome to Vivaldi. This is starting to look like early-00s Internet Explorer all over again, just with a different BigCorp behind the wheel. Still need to buy a few things to make self-hosting email and my personal site practical, but hopefully that'll all be set up in a few weeks as well. Bye Google.

OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago

'statistical probability of antitrust: zero, full speed ahead!'

Mikho 8y ago

Surprised about all the fuzz. The good part about Chrome is one may create many sessions/users in Chrome. So, I use one dedicated Chrome user to access Google services and use another not logged into Google user in a different session for everything else. There is really no problem if one knows how to use Chrome. Really good part is that it's possible to create a shortcut to a site/service from a particular user session in Chrome and launch that shortcut as a headless standalone window that looks like Windows native app, not a browser. The shortcut is connected to the user session it was created from. So, for example, I have Gmail icon on my desktop and taskbar that launches a dedicated window to access mail without even starting Chrome browser session for Google user. Simultaneously I have Chrome opened with another, not Google, user/session. Problem solved--check mail, calendar, whatever in one sandboxed environment and browse the web in another one.

captainmuon 8y ago

If the log-into chrome would just reflect the login state into google's services, I think it would be much less controversal and actually useful. Imagine little indicators that show which identity providers you are logged into, like Facebook, Google, Twitter, .... You could do this by passively reading the site cookies in an extension (are you allowed to do that nowadays in extensions?). Even better, if you are not logged into, say, Facebook, block third party cookies from their domains so it's harder for them to track you. I think I have a good idea for a weekend project...

wrs 8y ago

Inaccurate headline — according to later messages it does delete the Google cookies, but the auto sign in feature (discussed earlier) recreates them, as it obviously must. I don’t think an additional wave of hysterical dismay is justified here.

mdavidn 8y ago
“When you sign into Gmail, you also sign into Chrome.” How does this feature “obviously” imply that Chrome must recreate tracking cookies? My expetation would be that, after deleting all cookies, I’m signed into the browser but not Gmail.

neolefty 8y ago

Technically, it does remove the cookies. And then instantly you get new ones, from being logged in to your G account at the browser level.

anticensor 8y ago
This is worse than not removing them as your bandwith cap would drain.

qubax 8y ago

So "clear browsing history" ( from all time ) really doesn't do what it says anymore? It doesn't even clear youtube history? Wowsa. If google is this bad, I wonder what microsoft is really storing. I wonder what ISPs are storing. Also, this type of news doesn't give me much confidence when it comes to android either.

makecheck 8y ago

You have to be able to trust your tools. Imagine if “rm” just decided to occasionally set aside files instead of removing them. The “star” in “rm star” means “remove everything”, not “remove, asterisk” where at the bottom of the page the asterisk lists exceptions like some kind of marketing weasel. Sheesh.

lann 8y ago
`rm *` doesn't remove files starting with `.` (on most shells)...

tebruno99 8y ago

Chrome 69, the The Google Chrome that Sucks and F*&#s

peheje 8y ago

I'll take a look at Firefox.

contem 8y ago

I like to think that Google is just not a conventional company and that they do everything to not become one. They creatively solve challenges (like how to keep certain cookies when a user presses "remove all") and this helps them provide unbiased, accurate, and free access to the world's information. People wanting to stay signed in can rely on them to do the right thing, even if in the near term the financial returns are not obvious. Their corporate structure is aligned with this objectivity: Serving their end users is at the heart of what they do. When people are logged off you can't really consider them your number one priority, because they don't either. Many Silicon Valley companies are under pressure to keep their earnings in line with short-term analyst's forecasts, Google is no exception here. But forced and universal log-in to Google's services optimizes for long-term return. Everybody hoped, but nobody believed, that Google would end up in this powerful position: Being able to strong-arm your power users, while still providing the best, most accurate, search results for people not logged in. In the end, this business tactic of universal and forced log-in makes the world, and by extension the internet, a better place. I know some people here raise privacy concerns, but this change clearly protects a user's privacy.

davidf18 8y ago

We need disclosure laws. If the program no longer clears Google Cookies, the user should be warned when they clear cookies with Chrome that Google cookies are not cleared.

kerng 8y ago

I can't help to think that the new Google's CEO is not setting the right standards and values for the company. Google's been on a roll recently with privacy violations and related "doing evil" news. Someone on top must be encouraging it, or at least not hold people accountable.

reidrac 8y ago

I had to leave Firefox for Chrome at the office because Meet and Hangouts; I missed this: https://blog.mozilla.org/webrtc/firefox-is-now-supported-by-google-hangouts-and-meet/ https://blog.mozilla.org/webrtc/firefox-is-now-supported-by-... Since Firefox 60 you don't need Chrome for that, so I'm back to Firefox. Firefox isn't perfect, and that was OK because there was always Chrome. Now it starts to feel like it is Firefox or nothing, which isn't ideal.

thsealienbstrds 8y ago

It's like some people at Google realize that the company's image is messed up beyond repair. So they decided they might as well go full-on evil and make as much money as they can before the party's over.

_virtu 8y ago

Annnnnd I'm moving to brave.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

pertymcpert 8y ago

I've seen very few people questioning Pichai as Tim Cook gets questioned. Why does he get a free pass?

_zachs 8y ago

Just want to chime in here, if you're ok deciding that Google engineers should be quitting their jobs, you should be fine deleting any Google services you're still a part of.

samstave 8y ago

I'm beginning to think that all the craziness surrounding the Bad Things (TM) Chrome is doing, is being done surreptitiously as a warning from engineering in Google to GTFO... Given how google is embracing and building for totalitarian markets, such as China, as are its peers in the tech space - I think this is maybe a way to warn people to get the hell away from Google's products.

erkose 8y ago

Next up: Connecting to third party google ad sites that have been blocked by an addon that cancels a chrome.webRequest.onBeforeRequest.

lainproliant 8y ago

Goodbye Chrome.

tomxor 8y ago

OK that's enough, I had been doing a slow transition but this is just a step too far, qutebrowser is now my main browser... I just want a decent browser engine with a front-end that respects me, qute gets me chromium without the increasingly bullshit front end user "features".

csomar 8y ago

That does it for me. I have tried the latest FireFox version and it is faster, for the first time. I've been reluctant to switch but these last updates hit the nail everywhere. The tabs are worse. Chrome is slowish as hell and the intrusion is insane. Job well done chrome.

fixermark 8y ago

Updated tweets indicate it deletes the cookies then immediately creates new ones? This is probably related to that login-state sync between the browser and Google account previously discussed; it'd be really weird to me if deleting my cookies logged me out of my browser account, but that means it's also really weird if it logs me out of Gmail if I'm still in my Google account in the browser itself.

dbg31415 8y ago

Anyone have time to create a plugin mapping site? That was the only hangup I had to move over to Firefox. Most things work on Firefox, or there's a similar plugin. Still looking for a few: * Flix Assist - Chrome Web Store || https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/flix-assist/jeeccngbdajjccceabkpadjmbakhdbnp https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/flix-assist/jeeccn... * WhatFont - Chrome Web Store || https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/whatfont/jabopobgcpjmedljpbcaablpmlmfcogm https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/whatfont/jabopobgc... And... Lighthouse. A few of the plugins I used on Chrome don't quite have perfect matches... * Create Link - Chrome Web Store || https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/create-link/gcmghdmnkfdbncmnmlkkglmnnhagajbm https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/create-link/gcmghd... -- haven't found a Firefox addon that lets me copy URL + Title via keyboard shortcut. Also looking for a way to change Firefox's default Apple + Shift + 5 to not try and take a Firefox screenshot, as Apple + Shift + 5 is my Skitch shortcut.

mortehu 8y ago

If you want to delete all cookies and site data, go to the "All cookies and site data" page in settings (chrome://settings/siteData) and click delete all. This also deletes Google cookies. If you just want to browse without your existing cookies, I suggest opening a Guest Window. Just open the "Current User" menu and then "Open Guest window". That way you don't have to delete them at the end. This is assuming you're in good faith trying to delete cookies, and just can't figure out how.

CommanderData 8y ago

Remember when every developer was a advocate of Google Chrome? The outrage begins but only for .000001% of users. Google could not care less. I haven't switched like most people here say they have, I have made an effort to install alternatives and use them. A better way to protest is to begin supporting Firefox in other ways such as writing your web apps and extensions.

dzonga 8y ago

Firefox on Mac can kill the battery and be a performance hog so far simply disabling auto-update might solve, some cases if you use FirefoxDeveloperEdition.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

CitizenTekk 8y ago

But for an SEO like me, I will really get a hard time dropping google as it still control almost the powerful SERPFs in the net. Will still find better ways and start re-evaluating things as an alternative, anyone here with suggestion will be very much welcome and appreciated. cheeky moves. Might as well just use it doing business related things and use firefox as personal browser.

talonx 8y ago

I have been a Firefox user for years. I have realized that in spite of it being more open, it is absolutely necessary to keep up to date with what Mozilla is up to. E.g. came across this today - https://blog.ungleich.ch/en-us/cms/blog/2018/08/04/mozillas-new-dns-resolution-is-dangerous/ https://blog.ungleich.ch/en-us/cms/blog/2018/08/04/mozillas-...