9 ms·

See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697436#c14 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697436#c14 Mozilla has a contract which prohibits Goog

See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697436#c14 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697436#c14 Mozilla has a contract which prohibits Google from using data from Mozilla websites for the things people usually object to.

dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
Some people don't believe Google at all and would prefer to not having their data handed over in any way, regardless of what Google promises.
- Fogest 7y ago
  Then block it with an extension? Mozilla has a specific contract against this. It's not just a "promise", it's a legal document. Why would Google care to violate that contract and risk a big shitstorm just to use the data from one company?
  - neilv 7y ago
    You're telling someone to add a browser extension to block some privacy invasion that a privacy-touting browser vendor is willfully doing? What about the interests of the users who don't even know they have to do that silliness? Also, threat of poo-storm is not always sufficient incentive to respect privacy or even agreements with governments (after you're caught brazenly violating privacy): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9432518/Google-we-failed-to-delete-all-Streetview-data.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9432518/Google...
    - Fogest 7y ago
      Correct. At some point if you can't trust any companies, especially when in a contract like this one then you may as well use NoScript because it's unavoidable in this current state :/
  - rossy 7y ago
    It's not just intentional data misuse that you have to watch out for. There's also accidental data misuse and data theft. Users are safest when they aren't being tracked at all. As privacy advocates, I think Mozilla should take this into account.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
    For many reasons. First, because they can, and nobody will ever have a chance to know about it. It's not like people are going to whistleblow: from the comments of many Googlers here I understood they (or a reasonably large number of them) really don't see tracking as ethically wrong. That's of course very good for their mental health, but less so for the privacy of most Internet users.
neilv 7y ago
Two problems with that, both of which sound funny: 1. Trusting that supposed assurance. 2. Going to so much contortions to rationalize a third-party surveillance facility that you didn't need to use.
- simias 7y ago
  >2. Going to so much contortions to rationalize a third-party surveillance facility that you didn't need to use. That does seem rather strange to me too. Is GA that critical to Mozilla that it justified crafted a special agreement with Google to keep using it? Why not re-implement the key functionalities themselves, surely they have the internal resources to do something like that. It seems like a weird decision, especially now that they're getting very aggressive with the "we respect your privacy (unlike Google)" angle.
  - calcifer 7y ago
    Because building, deploying and maintaining your own (of anything) comes at a significant cost and a tailor made contract for preserving privacy seems like a great alternative.
    - hartator 7y ago
      You have open sourced google analytics like tools. eg Piwik. Also just analyzing server logs should be enough in most use cases.
      - vkou 7y ago
        > Also just analyzing server logs should be enough in most use cases. That sounds like a fantastic way to play GDPR roulette. Did the guy you hire to spec and build the server log analyzer follow the law, or did he just wing it? Contrast that to just using a SAAS offering, where you have someone to sue...
        hartator 7y ago
t0astbread 7y ago
What incentive did Google have to agree to such a contract?
- bastawhiz 7y ago
  Being paid money they otherwise wouldn't be paid?
- ubercow13 7y ago
  Maybe they knew it would undermine any anti-Google privacy stance Mozilla would later take when people noticed GA's inclusion in various Mozilla pages
- autoexec 7y ago
  They get money and there's no way anyone could ever find out if they continue to log people regardless. Free money getting to track all firefox users is a pretty great incentive.
hartator 7y ago
> our GA premium account Flexing a lot for a non-profit.
dontbenebby 7y ago
How is that contract audited?

dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago

Some people don't believe Google at all and would prefer to not having their data handed over in any way, regardless of what Google promises.

Fogest 7y ago
Then block it with an extension? Mozilla has a specific contract against this. It's not just a "promise", it's a legal document. Why would Google care to violate that contract and risk a big shitstorm just to use the data from one company?
- neilv 7y ago
  You're telling someone to add a browser extension to block some privacy invasion that a privacy-touting browser vendor is willfully doing? What about the interests of the users who don't even know they have to do that silliness? Also, threat of poo-storm is not always sufficient incentive to respect privacy or even agreements with governments (after you're caught brazenly violating privacy): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9432518/Google-we-failed-to-delete-all-Streetview-data.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9432518/Google...
  - Fogest 7y ago
    Correct. At some point if you can't trust any companies, especially when in a contract like this one then you may as well use NoScript because it's unavoidable in this current state :/
- rossy 7y ago
  It's not just intentional data misuse that you have to watch out for. There's also accidental data misuse and data theft. Users are safest when they aren't being tracked at all. As privacy advocates, I think Mozilla should take this into account.
- dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
  For many reasons. First, because they can, and nobody will ever have a chance to know about it. It's not like people are going to whistleblow: from the comments of many Googlers here I understood they (or a reasonably large number of them) really don't see tracking as ethically wrong. That's of course very good for their mental health, but less so for the privacy of most Internet users.

neilv 7y ago

Two problems with that, both of which sound funny: 1. Trusting that supposed assurance. 2. Going to so much contortions to rationalize a third-party surveillance facility that you didn't need to use.

simias 7y ago
>2. Going to so much contortions to rationalize a third-party surveillance facility that you didn't need to use. That does seem rather strange to me too. Is GA that critical to Mozilla that it justified crafted a special agreement with Google to keep using it? Why not re-implement the key functionalities themselves, surely they have the internal resources to do something like that. It seems like a weird decision, especially now that they're getting very aggressive with the "we respect your privacy (unlike Google)" angle.
- calcifer 7y ago
  Because building, deploying and maintaining your own (of anything) comes at a significant cost and a tailor made contract for preserving privacy seems like a great alternative.
  - hartator 7y ago
    You have open sourced google analytics like tools. eg Piwik. Also just analyzing server logs should be enough in most use cases.
    - vkou 7y ago
      > Also just analyzing server logs should be enough in most use cases. That sounds like a fantastic way to play GDPR roulette. Did the guy you hire to spec and build the server log analyzer follow the law, or did he just wing it? Contrast that to just using a SAAS offering, where you have someone to sue...
      - hartator 7y ago

t0astbread 7y ago

What incentive did Google have to agree to such a contract?

bastawhiz 7y ago
Being paid money they otherwise wouldn't be paid?
ubercow13 7y ago
Maybe they knew it would undermine any anti-Google privacy stance Mozilla would later take when people noticed GA's inclusion in various Mozilla pages
autoexec 7y ago
They get money and there's no way anyone could ever find out if they continue to log people regardless. Free money getting to track all firefox users is a pretty great incentive.

hartator 7y ago

> our GA premium account Flexing a lot for a non-profit.

dontbenebby 7y ago

How is that contract audited?