3 ms·

Let me put it another way. Do you think the average user knows of or would approve of Google Chrome itself sending information to an advertising network that co

by 0xy 6y ago

Let me put it another way. Do you think the average user knows of or would approve of Google Chrome itself sending information to an advertising network that could be used to track their behaviors and identity? Do you think this "feature" is adequately disclosed to customers downloading Google Chrome, that it includes a DoubleClick tracking backdoor that no other ad network or website receives.

joshuamorton 6y ago
Given that > that it includes a DoubleClick tracking backdoor that no other ad network or website receives. is false, yes, I think the disclosures are reasonable. Your standard of disclosure is that companies need to disclose things that they aren't actually doing. That's ridiculous.
- 0xy 6y ago
  How do you know they're not using it for tracking, beyond an ambiguous PR statement that actually doesn't even say they aren't using it for tracking? What makes you sure of that? There are literally billions of dollars on the line. Does Safari or Firefox implement a similar tracking header? If it's so needed for experiments, why is Chrome literally the only browser sending this data to their advertising network (or any site)? If Google were using it for tracking purposes, they'd never confirm that unless forced to. Hence the ambiguous PR statement.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    > Hence the ambiguous PR statement. There's nothing ambiguous about "is not used to identify or track individual users.". Any form of personalized ad tracking would require tracking individual users, by definition. So there's your answer. Your attempts to create weaseling where there isn't any, so that you can continue to exclaim about the potentials for tracking don't actually change the ambiguity of the statement. > How do you know they're not using it for tracking Well I mentioned upthread I work at Google, right? Let me ask a question: Google has historically been notorious for not being able to keep things secret, especially controversial things. How is it that Google is managing to keep this major component of tracking, that has to touch multiple major products and involve various teams a secret?
    - 0xy 6y ago
      If Google can't keep things quiet, where can I find a rough list of factors DoubleClick uses in order to track users? Has any of those factors leaked in the past? Would anyone on the ad team at Google jeopardize their $350k per year to leak unethical behavior in that division? There's plenty ambiguous about that statement. Firstly, it doesn't cover past or future. Room for weaseling there. Secondly, it specifically says "track individual users", rather than include devices or just say "tracking" generally. Could they be tracking multiple users with the data point of "rarely updates browser"? According to that statement, they didn't rule it out. That statement explicitly does not say they are not using that information to track devices or Chrome installs. In fact, it doesn't even say it isn't a factor in ad targeting algorithms. Given it was written by Google's highly skilled PR team, and not a developer, I'm inclined to believe they wrote this ambiguously for a reason. Google does not have a good track record with the truth or community goodwill (they stabbed Firefox in the back). It's an advertising company making billions of dollars specifically from the use of tracking data. You're asking me to trust that said advertising company isn't using a tracking ID for tracking purposes when said ID is sent directly to their advertising domains.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        > If Google can't keep things quiet, where can I find a rough list of factors DoubleClick uses in order to track users? Do you mean like, categories into which it divides users (age, gender, interest), in which case a reasonable answer is https://adssettings.google.com/ https://adssettings.google.com/ or do you mean what request attributes it uses to make these determinations initially and tie them to particular users? In which case the answer is primarily cookies: https://policies.google.com/technologies/types?hl=en-US https://policies.google.com/technologies/types?hl=en-US. You're asking me to prove a negative, and you're starting from the assumption that Google must be lying. > In fact, it doesn't even say it isn't a factor in ad targeting algorithms. How can something be a factor in ad targeting without being used to target individuals?
        0xy 6y ago
        >How can something be a factor in ad targeting without being used to target individuals? Really weird question. Easy. The tracking ID sent to DoubleClick could be used to target groups of people, such as "people who rarely update their browser". Such heuristics can indicate age, tech knowledge, etc. No other browser is doing this. Why does Google need to send such tracking information to DoubleClick? You cannot justify it without also explaining why Safari and Firefox don't need this. Coupled with Google's other self-dealing behavior such as refusing to crackdown on egregious third-party cookies like Safari and Firefox, then this is starting to look very suspicious. For me personally, the fact this data is even being sent is the smoking gun. Shifting the goalposts to "well we don't abuse it" is classic gaslighting. You don't need to send tracking information to an advertising network. Why should I trust an advertising network with a hard-coded, impossible to disable, opaque tracking backdoor in the first place? Google does not disclose it does this. Google provides no way to opt out. Google has not adequately explained why it needs to send it to DoubleClick, given Google Analytics. Google snuck this into the Chromium source code hoping nobody noticed.

by 0xy 6y ago

joshuamorton 6y ago

Given that > that it includes a DoubleClick tracking backdoor that no other ad network or website receives. is false, yes, I think the disclosures are reasonable. Your standard of disclosure is that companies need to disclose things that they aren't actually doing. That's ridiculous.

0xy 6y ago
How do you know they're not using it for tracking, beyond an ambiguous PR statement that actually doesn't even say they aren't using it for tracking? What makes you sure of that? There are literally billions of dollars on the line. Does Safari or Firefox implement a similar tracking header? If it's so needed for experiments, why is Chrome literally the only browser sending this data to their advertising network (or any site)? If Google were using it for tracking purposes, they'd never confirm that unless forced to. Hence the ambiguous PR statement.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  > Hence the ambiguous PR statement. There's nothing ambiguous about "is not used to identify or track individual users.". Any form of personalized ad tracking would require tracking individual users, by definition. So there's your answer. Your attempts to create weaseling where there isn't any, so that you can continue to exclaim about the potentials for tracking don't actually change the ambiguity of the statement. > How do you know they're not using it for tracking Well I mentioned upthread I work at Google, right? Let me ask a question: Google has historically been notorious for not being able to keep things secret, especially controversial things. How is it that Google is managing to keep this major component of tracking, that has to touch multiple major products and involve various teams a secret?
  - 0xy 6y ago
    If Google can't keep things quiet, where can I find a rough list of factors DoubleClick uses in order to track users? Has any of those factors leaked in the past? Would anyone on the ad team at Google jeopardize their $350k per year to leak unethical behavior in that division? There's plenty ambiguous about that statement. Firstly, it doesn't cover past or future. Room for weaseling there. Secondly, it specifically says "track individual users", rather than include devices or just say "tracking" generally. Could they be tracking multiple users with the data point of "rarely updates browser"? According to that statement, they didn't rule it out. That statement explicitly does not say they are not using that information to track devices or Chrome installs. In fact, it doesn't even say it isn't a factor in ad targeting algorithms. Given it was written by Google's highly skilled PR team, and not a developer, I'm inclined to believe they wrote this ambiguously for a reason. Google does not have a good track record with the truth or community goodwill (they stabbed Firefox in the back). It's an advertising company making billions of dollars specifically from the use of tracking data. You're asking me to trust that said advertising company isn't using a tracking ID for tracking purposes when said ID is sent directly to their advertising domains.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      > If Google can't keep things quiet, where can I find a rough list of factors DoubleClick uses in order to track users? Do you mean like, categories into which it divides users (age, gender, interest), in which case a reasonable answer is https://adssettings.google.com/ https://adssettings.google.com/ or do you mean what request attributes it uses to make these determinations initially and tie them to particular users? In which case the answer is primarily cookies: https://policies.google.com/technologies/types?hl=en-US https://policies.google.com/technologies/types?hl=en-US. You're asking me to prove a negative, and you're starting from the assumption that Google must be lying. > In fact, it doesn't even say it isn't a factor in ad targeting algorithms. How can something be a factor in ad targeting without being used to target individuals?
      - 0xy 6y ago
        >How can something be a factor in ad targeting without being used to target individuals? Really weird question. Easy. The tracking ID sent to DoubleClick could be used to target groups of people, such as "people who rarely update their browser". Such heuristics can indicate age, tech knowledge, etc. No other browser is doing this. Why does Google need to send such tracking information to DoubleClick? You cannot justify it without also explaining why Safari and Firefox don't need this. Coupled with Google's other self-dealing behavior such as refusing to crackdown on egregious third-party cookies like Safari and Firefox, then this is starting to look very suspicious. For me personally, the fact this data is even being sent is the smoking gun. Shifting the goalposts to "well we don't abuse it" is classic gaslighting. You don't need to send tracking information to an advertising network. Why should I trust an advertising network with a hard-coded, impossible to disable, opaque tracking backdoor in the first place? Google does not disclose it does this. Google provides no way to opt out. Google has not adequately explained why it needs to send it to DoubleClick, given Google Analytics. Google snuck this into the Chromium source code hoping nobody noticed.