11 ms·
Never-Googlers: Web users take the ultimate step to guard their data
- Animats 7y agoWell, of course. Just don't sign up for a Google account. When you get an Android phone new, there's a moment when it asks you to sign up or sign in with a Google account. There's a "later" option". Click that, and then remove the Google one-time startup program. Install F-Droid, and get your apps from there. The mail program on Android will talk to an IMAP server. Find one to use, and you don't need Gmail. No ads. On desktop, use Firefox, LibraOffice, and Thunderbird. Install Privacy Badger from the EFF. Videos are uploaded to Vimeo. I have a cheap web site on HostGator if I need to upload anything for someone else to look at, and a Github account for code storage. I've been doing this for years, and don't seem to be missing out on anything except ads.
- sverige 7y agoIn my experience, the difficulty is spending the time and energy to set these things up for family who might not be as willing to stray from the path of least resistance.
- ocdtrekkie 7y agoThat's why the best choice is just to recommend your family get an iPhone. The default/least resistant path is far more private.
- SmellyGeekBoy 7y agoApple are harvesting just as much data, they're just being less evil with it... For now.
- jamespo 7y agonope
- makosharky 7y agoApple takes steps to encrypt the data so that even they don't have access to it.
- joosters 7y agoSurely your phone is still repeatedly in touch with Google servers because you've got all that Google software on there. Just because you haven't signed in with a google account doesn't mean Google don't know who you are.
- skybrian 7y agoIt doesn't mean they know who you are, either. That depends on what data is transmitted, what is stored, who has access to it, and what it means philosophically to know who someone is. There is not enough information to say. If there is tracking data associated with a phone but it's not associated with your real name, in what sense can you say they know you? There is a risk someone (who?) can connect it with other data somehow, and then all the pieces fall into place. But maybe it hasn't happened yet? So, this is all preventative. Nobody knows what's going to happen, but better to avoid tracking, just in case.
- lonelappde 7y agoIf the police come to arrest Mr Anonymous because my phone activity matches something of interest, they will learn who I am when they knock down my door. My phone has a cellular account with my name attached to it.
- skybrian 7y agoWell, at least you have a fairly specific threat model. But opsec for avoiding discovery by the police seems pretty hard?
- dredmorbius 7y agoPostal code (available via weak geocoding) of work + home locations is 90% effective in identifying a single individual. Anynymised hash caad09aeb361e1d6052c81db1db0e8523e34fca0909b6b2f21bd2ae39f9045e2 with > 0.90 probability of nocturnal location X and diurnal location Y is not anonymous.
- com2kid 7y agoBonus work: Make sure none of your friends upload a photo with you in it, which basically means they don't take your photo with an Android phone. If somehow your picture does get onto an Android phone, somehow make sure you aren't labeled.
- komali2 7y agoBetter: Download a fuckload of https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/ https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/ photos, create social media accounts under your name, and bloat the accounts with these photos while tagging yourself.
- hombre_fatal 7y agoAll that work just to have your misinformation trivially filtered out.
- komali2 7y agoTrivially how?
- saltminer 7y agoFacial recognition isn't fooled unless others participate in this, and even then it's going to be localized. Google Photos recognizes that the John Smiths in my contacts are unlikely to be the same John Smiths in thousands of other peoples contacts, and can easily differentiate between the 2 John Smiths in my contacts because I've tagged a few of each. If your friends who have added you on social media also uploaded random crap and tagged you in it, it could fool the facial recognition for your group of friends, but if <distant relative> who has no mutual friends with you on social media tags you correctly in their photos, it probably won't fix it for your friends since it will probably assume they're 2 different yous.
- sdan 7y agoSmart idea. I love it.
- Dunedan 7y agoThat doesn't prevent Google from collecting information about you. Even though you don't actively use Google on your Android device, doesn't mean it doesn't phone home and reports information to Google. For example, if you don't actively disable it, your phone sends the names of all Wifi-networks in your proximity to Google, so Google can tell you where you are faster and more accurate than with GPS. Even if you disable it, your phone will still fetch GPS positioning information from Google unless you change that to use another service. And so on and so on ... That's just one example, but there are multiple occasions where your stock Android phone phones home to Google.
- lern_too_spel 7y ago> For example, if you don't actively disable it, your phone sends the names of all Wifi-networks in your proximity to Google, so Google can tell you where you are faster and more accurate than with GPS. Even if you disable it, your phone will still fetch GPS positioning information from Google unless you change that to use another service. Nope. Sending this data to Google requires an opt in on Android (Google Location Services checkbox in the device setup flow). iOS has the same location system, but it won't even let you opt out of it, and that might be the source of your confusion.
- Animats 7y agoRight. I use Mozilla's location services, OpenStreetMap, and ZaNavi with locally stored maps. Not from fanaticism. It's just less hassle. Google is always getting in your face, wanting something or pushing an "upgrade" or or advertising something. Don't need that.
- close04 7y agoFor any regular non-technical user locking down most Android phones (presumably some phones come with hardened settings and possibly with no Google services) and keeping the data away for Google is a huge challenge. The default settings are almost always very permissive, you have to dig down through settings to disable everything, and a lot of stuff isn't very obvious for anyone who doesn't expect such behavior. Oh even when the WiFi is off it will still scan for nearby SSIDs to get your position? https://digitalcontentnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/DCN-Google-Data-Collection-Paper.pdf https://digitalcontentnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/DC...
- babypuncher 7y agoGoogle tracking is baked into Android pretty deep. Simply not having an account doesn't stop Google from tracking what you do on your phone.
- vetinari 7y agoIt requires being signed in. If you are not signed in, for extra safety you can also disable google play framework and all google apps. You won't get things like fused location, but hey, that one requires connecting to google services too.
- panpanna 7y agoYou may or may not be right about this. The only way to verify this is to install some system level firewall and carefully inspect all logs. Until you do that, we simple don't know.
- vetinari 7y agoOr you can inspect AOSP itself and bring your device to AOSP-like state. Sure, you won't know whether the vendor of your device didn't modify the firmware itself, but what motivation is there for Samsung, Sony or Huawei to help Google to get user data?
- southerntofu 7y ago> what motivation is there for Samsung, Sony or Huawei to help Google to get user data? I'm not sure about their motivation, but several vendors are famously known for bundling spyware with their phones. Usually within the keyboard app or some telemetry system. > bring your device to AOSP-like state That's a solution but is impossible without having a clean ROM at your disposal. Google's spyware is contained within Google Play Services, which you can't get rid of that easily.
- madez 7y ago
- amaccuish 7y agoIMAP doesn't support push :(
- maximente 7y agowow, i had no idea someone in what i assume is rural South Carolina is willing to undertake a pretty substantial convenience/time cost - drive 40 miles (and back?) to purchase directly - in order to better guard their privacy. wonder if he also prefers cash? although this article is google-focused, not more generally on privacy which would presumably involve defeating credit card companies with cash. i'm wondering what order of magnitude of people would do the same across the country. tens of thousands?
- chiefalchemist 7y agoThere's a new bridge near me. No cash tolls. It's either EasyPass or they photograph your plates and mail you the bill. I presume the lack of cash tolls is semi intentional. I mean all cars are being photographed, as you can borrow and EasyPass.
- ocdtrekkie 7y agoCash (largely, coinage, actually, for a tollbooth) has to be collected and transported. A lot of newer and lower-volume toll exits around me are pass-only. But since the tollway charges double for non-pass users anyways... everyone has the pass.
- chiefalchemist 7y ago> "A lot of newer and lower-volume toll exits around me are pass-only. But since the tollway charges double for non-pass users anyways... everyone has the pass." So making collection easier not only handed over our privacy, it made doing it (i.e., tools) more often and for less money. And there's Liberty on the side of the road...death by one penny pricks?
- nvrspyx 7y agoCash tolls cost more. You either need people stationed to collect the toll or send people every so often to collect the tolls from the machines. The machines would also need more maintenance than the camera or EasyPass system because they're mechanical. You also need the camera system regardless in case someone drives through without paying or simply doesn't have cash on hand. Plus, people will need exact change or have the machine (or employees) return the correct change if it's not a coinage machine. This also means cash tolls are slower and cause more congestion. Finally, fewer and fewer people have cash on hand.
- phmagic 7y ago(disclaimer: I work at a big tech firm, but I've had this opinion before working here) I'm confused by the lengths people have gone through to "protect" themselves from internet giants while freely giving away their info to credit card companies, traditional retailers, small businesses. Credit card transaction data have been sold for years without most of us knowing about it. Small startups, boutique stores rarely have the security or data governance resources to ensure your data is stored and used properly. Data breaches are common even at large brick-and-mortar retailers. Given the state of data security outside of big tech, my best option is to trust only big tech.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ocdtrekkie 7y agoI would point out that many organizations collect data, but tech companies are the most effective at abusing it. Their competence makes them by far, the most dangerous.
- giggles_giggles 7y agoIt's the breadth and depth of data which Google, Facebook, and Amazon have access to (and their ability to leverage it) that changes the privacy threat model entirely. A mom and pop store I give my credit card to in town can't track me across the Internet and correlate my browsing activity to my purchases, for whatever nefarious purpose, for instance. They can't read my email and correlate it with my location data. And so on. That's the difference. Worse, Google in particular is financially incentivized to track me and perform all that correlation for the purposes of advertising. A family owned business I visit downtown, not so much.
- madez 7y ago> I'm confused by the lengths people have gone through to "protect" themselves from internet giants while freely giving away their info to credit card companies, traditional retailers, small businesses. You are invalidly generalizing. I try to eliminate all contact I have with the tech giants, and I do not have a credit card, I am at a privacy respecting bank (GLS Gemeinschaftsbank), and I use cash. Additionally, by sharing your data with a company, you give that company power over yourself and others by enabling them with the knowledge they have over you. Considering this, it is less problematic to give access to data to a small company compared to a tech giant.
- chiefalchemist 7y agoNot to get off topic but there are still plenty of ecomm/mail order companies that'll take a phone order. I understand this guy's concern. I don't understand why he's driving (and likely being tracked along the way).
- proc0 7y ago> In the small South Carolina town of Newberry, Bob's Red Mill muesli cereal is hard to come by. dammit grandpa get to the point!
- Zhenya 7y ago>Such never-Googlers are pushing friends and family to give up the search and advertising titan, while others are taking to social media to get word out. That'll show em, post on facebook about it...
- johnchristopher 7y agoYeah, everyone knows Facebook isn't a platform to influence people. /s
- close04 7y agoIt may be easier to use FB to spread the word about Google than the other way around. You have to start somewhere.
- tantalor 7y agoYou can opt out of analytics: https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/181881?hl=en https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/181881?hl=en
- giancarlostoro 7y agoThis is not the only analytics company though. There are many others. Others that even buy your credit transaction history, how do you opt out of that? I bet those no annual fee cards would bring back fees if they were forced to keep your data private.
- tantalor 7y agoIncognito mode?
- rjf72 7y agoIncognito mode is mostly useless as an actual privacy tool. You're still exposing a substantial amount of information. The most basic would be your IP. Most IPs are of course dynamic, but there are two factors here: 1) The IP only changes when your lease expires or you manually renew it. This is not a normal part of starting an incognito session. Google has a confirmed identity (such as by being logged into a Google service) of tantalor at IP x. A few seconds later IP x shows up at SteamyHotPornSite.com that's running Google analytics or otherwise providing tracking for Google - a recent study of 22,484 porn sites found Google trackers present on 74% [1]). That's 100% tantalor. 2) Even in cases where the IP does change, it's constrained to within a group. As most dynamic IPs are also geomapped, it's often a relatively small group. Now what information is exposed during incognito can be cross-referenced against a very small group of potentials. You can likely hit near 100% on this as well. And that's just one datum, though granted it's quite a useful one! Incognito should be seen as a tool that does little more than disable any cookies you have and automatically [kind of - depends on your OS] deletes your local browsing history. [1] - https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-google-quietly-tracking-porn-you-watch-2019-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-google-quietly-trac...
- SomeOldThrow 7y agoTaking the ultimate step to guard your data would surely involve writing laws or dismantling data centers (I prefer the former). Ultimately what you opt into has little relation to what people actually know about you: you can't really opt out of credit, or out of things like Comcast requiring your social security number as identification and authorization, or out of the fact that it's become the cultural norm to accept ad-supported services as the sole access to communities.
- eejjjj82 7y ago" In the small South Carolina town of Newberry, Bob's Red Mill muesli cereal is hard to come by. That presents a challenge for resident Gregory Kelly, who can't get enough of the stuff. He'd rather not truck the 40 miles or so to Columbia to stock up on it, but he's also loath to buy it from the company's website, which he says is riddled with tracking software from Google" Somebody get this man a Firefox Privacy Tab
- bhauer 7y agoI feel the author was struggling to find a suitable anecdote to open the story. And this one seems a bit far-fetched, perhaps even exaggerated by Mr. Kelly as a means of illustrating the hassle of curtailing the surveillance apparatus of Google. But someone who has gone to the lengths described probably knows how to block requests to google-analytics.com.
- AdmiralAsshat 7y agoIt is pretty good cereal, though. Way better than some of those bland, mushy quick oats.
- elcomet 7y agoThey still get your ip address
- imgabe 7y agoVPN
- fortran77 7y ago"There are dozens of us!"
- SamWhited 7y agoI did this a few years ago and the blog post (to my suprise) got covered on Ars Technica and others. It always amazes me how people respond with disbelief or with wonder and awe as if it's some difficult or hard to do thing. At the time there were good, if not better, alternatives for almost everything. The only thing I stuck with was Gmail and Google calendar, but since then I've discovered Fastmail which I think is far better at both (I highly recommend them, they're fairly inexpensive and that means you're not the product, you're the customer). Although for me it was less about privacy (at the time) and more about the fact that I had become dependent on the inter-connections between Google services so when they killed one (ie. Reader) it has a much bigger impact on my personal life than it should have. Now any time a product dies it's easy to move my data over to something else and I never get reliant on interoperability between branded services. I've also got Google Analytics black holed in Firefox, and run an ad blocker of course which (I hope) catches most of their trackers; this just seems good for anyone to do though, even if they're not giving up Google's other services.
- yters 7y agoAt this point with the proliferation of cameras and listening devices, the only way to stay off Google's servers is to live in the backwoods, or in an undeveloped country, or live on a boat. Kinda creepy, actually, when I say it like that. If Google is just a front for NSA then I'd say Big Brother is complete.
- saltminer 7y ago>"I am giving up more than I am getting" from Google, said the 61-year tech consultant who started scaling back his Google usage a couple years ago when advertisements began appearing in his Gmail account. Ads have been in Gmail for many years, they just became more obvious with their recent design changes. >Joshua Greenbaum, of Berkeley, Calif., said he pays about $100 per year to use Microsoft Office 365 software that he says has better privacy protections than Google's. At least he's willing to put his money where his mouth is, though he's probably still using Windows. If I had a dollar for everyone who complained about Google but refused to self-host or pay for someone else to host their email... (Also, people who use free VPNs to avoid tracking. It's free for a reason.)
- pmoriarty 7y agoOne way that Google can track your web usage habits is through third-party websites using re-captchas and other Google services and resources, about which the end-user can do nothing except refuse to use web sites that require them. Unfortunately, Google is far from the only company that tracks users and collects data on them, so even if you were to somehow completely avoid Google tracking and data collection, you'd still be subject to tracking and data collection from others.
- aphextron 7y agoWeb search has become a commoditized service over the last few years. I've used DuckDuckGo exclusively for over a year now and it's actually really good, and I've switched over to iCloud for email. Even Apple maps is pretty decent nowadays. There's really nothing I need from Google anymore. Their moat is shrinking rapidly.
- dredmorbius 7y agoNearly a decade ago, then Google CEO Eric Schmidt said "The Google policy on a lot of things is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it." https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-schmidt-googles-policy-is-to-get-right-up-to-the-creepy-line-and-not-cross-it-2010-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-schmidt-googles-policy-... The problem with such a policy is in thinking that cultural and legal boundaries are fixed and inviolate. The very process of repeatedly pressing up to a border may trigger the backlash which moves it, and can leave the fate-tempting party in deep water -- with its own culture, processes, amd institutions unable to adapt, or with goodwill so badly burnt it never recovers. Google should have seen this coming long ago. It's a colossal failure of leadership that they've not.