Slashdot Mirror
Privacy Complaint Against Google's GMail Service
CRCates writes "Privacy groups in the UK have filed a complaint against Google over its new Gmail service. Privacy groups said they were concerned about Google's ability to link a user's personal details, supplied in the Gmail registration process, to Web-surfing behaviour through the use of a single cookie for its search and mail services. "
It hasn't even been launched yet, it's in beta. I'd imagine the people in this beta have signed some kind of agreement where they say they cannot do anything if they are adversly affected by Gmail, so what's the problem? Of course it's a different matter when it's launched to the public.
When anger rises, think of the consequences.
Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
Erase the cookie. Don't use the service. How do you know Yahoo! doesn't read all it's mail?
Welcome to paranoia.
Seems to me that if they give you a free gig of space, some targeted ads aren't too much to pay. Why not use some other mail and store it on your PC if you feel this is too invasive?
If you don't want them to have your personal info, then don't provide it! GMail is a service, not a requirement.
Since by the same measure, Microsoft can track a user by the personal information given through the passport/hotmail registration procedure through every website you visit using THEIR browser, every program you run on THEIR operating system, every document you read/write with THEIR office application.
Innocent until proven guilty. When they start using this for an invasion of privacy, then you can complain, at this point they haven't even offered the service, how can you complain that they've invaded your privacy.
Besides, if you don't like it, don't create an account and go back to wearing your tinfoil hat. They aren't using strongarm tactics to force you to use their product.
Jamon.
I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
I'm still not entirely sure what everyone's complaint is here. You don't have to join Gmail to use google. They openly admit that they may combine data (unlike everyone else who do combine data but refuse to tell anyone about it)
If you don't want google using your data, don't give it to them. Personally, I'm happy for google to have all my data if it will improve my browsing and emailing experience, and that is my personal choice to make.
What people should be complaining about is insurance and credit card companies which buy incomplete and incorrect sets of data and judge your credit rating based on it (it's happened to me). Now thats dodgy.
Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
It seems like most of the comments so far are along the lines "it's voluntary, google should be allowed to do what they want."
/. if this had been a Microsoft service.
It would be interesting to see the reaction on
You DO realize you're talking about the company that has cached the Internet, correct? And in RAM, no less (if I recall correctly - maybe it was just the most used pages that are cached in RAM.)
I've got more mod points and GMail invi
The article is very clear: privacy groups aren't just arguing that Google is violating privacy, they are arguing that Google is violating the law (by violating privacy).
It seems that European privacy law is much more strict than US law, and by retaining a subscriber's email even after they have deleted it or cancelled their account Google is breaking those laws.
Huge difference.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
When I first heard about the privacy concerns involved in the Gmail project, my initial reaction was to trust Google no matter what to "Do no evil." However, perhaps we should put aside our love for the company and ask critically whether this breeches acceptable advertising practices. For me, I'm uneasy with the idea of saving "deleted" mail.
Any one else think it's odd that a privacy group is complaing about a service that isn't available to the public yet? I'm all for privacy, but let's pick the reasonable battles. It will be repeated ad nauseum here, but you don't HAVE to sign up for Gmail.
I would much rather that privacy groups spend their finite resources fighting the stuff we don't have the option of avoiding, Big Government and such.
Seems like any other organization, privacy groups have to justify their existence by creating problems where none exist.
This seems to me to be very much a knee-jerk reaction. Provided that Google is up-fromt will all this, why shouldn't I be given the opportunity to opt-in to such a service? I entirely agree that this should not be done secretly - but Google is very upfront. Surely it is not an invasion of privacy if I explicitly accept that Google will scan my mail as part of paying for the service.
I like Google Adwords. Given that advertising is an endemic part of life, and is not going to go away, Adwords is the way I want it. Let Google take all the advertising revenue with Adwords, and may the popup merchants go broke. If Google want to offer a paid-for non-Adwords service, I shall think about it - and probably not buy it.
As to keeping some of your email when you delete it - I don't think this is intentional. AFAICS Google has a "weak delete" policy - they try to recover deleted space, but if they don't recover it all, too bad - disks are cheap. So there may well be old copies of your emails hanging round. What the hell - they are not indexed, so it will take a deep search to find it. Do Yahoo, Hotmail & Co guarantee a destructive overwrite when they delete your mail? I doubt it - in which case they might have an old copy lying round on their disks.
So, privacy people, don't spoil what looks like it might (subject to confirmation, of course) be a useful, opt-in service because of arcane potential privacy problems.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
Thank you.
I have several credit cards attached to my frequent flier program. I get a couple more e-mails and a couple more snail mails a month, but for no additional effort on my part (except for skimming through a couple of offers each month), I get a few thousand extra frequent flier miles each year. It's not enough for a free flight on its own, but it can push me over the edge if I'm close enough.
They have all kinds of information on me -- spending habits, information on where I live and where I travel -- but I entered into the contract willingly. I gave up a small part of my privacy in exchange for a benefit to me.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
I mean, think about it. Let's say that you have webmail with one of the other major providers. Somebody sends you mail. You reply. They reply. Now your email has a couple of levels of ">" in it. Wouldn't it be nice if they highlighted those in different colors or something?
/. said about ads that if they made sense, they wouldn't mind 'em? Guess what - that's targetting. And how they're supposed to make sense and be timely without some kind of processing is beyond me.
Oh, wait - they already do that? (Note: at least, this was common the last time I bothered with webmail which was some time ago). Guess what - that's "reading" your mail as well. In fact, they're just changing your display - without changing the verbal contact of your message - to make it more convenient for you.
Isn't that also a (reaching, but legitimate) description of providing targetted advertising? I mean, how many times have people here on
As for the article's complaint, it seems to focus around the fact that when you "delete" an email, Google doesn't guarantee that it goes away immediately. Their message seems to be talking about cache updates though - if they were willing to amend it with a service guarantee that within xx hours your email would be deleted, that would probably do the trick. Of course, then people would be arguing that they needed to provide complete file-trashing (triple overwrite, etc) as well, even though your regular email client and ISPs email account probably don't do that.
I think its just a case of being too cautious in their terms of use. In this case, being too honest where the other major providers are being "honest enough," and not worrying about caches, et cetera. Of course, they may be planning to use your old email for nefarious purposes, but somehow I doubt it. Either way, they should clarify their statement.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
Email in its basic form is not, nor has never been, private. There have never been any promises that email was private. I remember from the first time I used email that it was always likened to mailing stuff on a postcard, not in a sealed envelope. It's also not like Google is trying to hide the fact that they are scanning your emails. It is right out in the open in the terms of agreement. If you don't agree, don't sign up...
Anyway, the shorter point is, this kind of thing happens. The reason is happens is liability. If a criminal organization is using Google's GMail system for planning a robbery, or if a terrorist group decides they want to attack rail systems in Europe and wants to do so by using random public terminals to sign into email accounts that someone else hosts, it's a problem. If law enforcement comes looking and Google has to say "Oh, sorry - we respect privacy so much that we absolutely and permanently delete all traces of all email the second you touch the delete object!", it will not be a pleasant thing. The investigators will not be happy.
That's an interesting point. They might not be happy, but so? Does anyone have a legal (vs. moral) obligation to retain every piece of data Just In Case There's A Terrorist Hiding Under The Bed? Same with corporations. There's no law saying you need to have an email retention period of x, right? Companies do it for business reasons, not because it's mandatory (and in many cases [hello, Microsoft] it's come back to bite them in the ass).
I don't feel like like getting my email data-mined.
Thats basically what Google wants to do with your email, if you havn't figured it out already.
And I'm not going to join the horde in Google adulation- Google seem to be quite happy to mine your data six ways from anywhere. I definatly don't want all of my email and searching centralized like that to a company that whilst is a techical genius, seems to have some moral issues regarding personal data and the use thereof.
I'm not going to have a gmail account until that policy gets changed. Go privacy group in UK !!!
/b
|f(x)dx = F(b) - F(a)
I wonder how long it is before google are happily releasing personal information under Patriot Act orders. I know they might have no choice in such a case, but why store information that could be used to oppress American citizens when such an order does happen?
Google need to get some sense in this tyrannical age.
Is it just me or is this whole GMail thing an April Fools prank gone horribly wrong?
Read the Google news release again:
The inspiration for Gmail came from a Google user complaining about the poor quality of existing email services, recalled Larry Page, Google co-founder and president, Products. "She kvetched about spending all her time filing messages or trying to find them," Page said. "And when she's not doing that, she has to delete email like crazy to stay under the obligatory four megabyte limit. So she asked, 'Can't you people fix this?'"
The idea that there could be a better way to handle email caught the attention of a Google engineer who thought it might be a good "20 percent time" project. (Google requires engineers to spend a day a week on projects that interest them, unrelated to their day jobs). Millions of M&Ms later, Gmail was born.
Kinda fishy.
This is the country that has one video camera
for every 14 people, yes? At least people get
to _choose_ whether they want to use GMail or
not...
As it is clearly stated in the article, the problem is with EU law, which among other things states that individuals are in charge of information about them; this means that they can request to see all information held about them and to get it deleted. Storing private emails after the user has deleted them seems to run counter to this law.
Furthermore, in many EU countries there are certain rights that you cannot sign away in a contract, so Google cannot just point to the terms and conditions.
The solution might be to prevent EU residents from signing up to Gmail.
We don't give Microsoft a free pass, and it's time we stopped giving Google the benefit of the doubt. This whole GMail thing REEKS of privacy abuse potential.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
OK fine. So you don't have a GMail account, but what if you send mail to one?
Your boss: "I'm on the road - send me your status report IMMEDIATELY to yourboss@gmail.com"
Recruiter: "I have a job for you - send me your resume at somerecruiter@gmail.com..."
Does anybody else find it creepy that this article is posted at Yahoo?
I don't want to jump on the SlashThink wagon, but does anyone storing e-mails on a free remote server have an expectation of privacy about automated searches and indexing? After all, your e-mail has to be read by machine at some point or another, or it isn't an e-mail. And is should be backed up. The only thing I can see about this is Google stuck their foot firmly in their mouth about basically accepted industry practices.
The ______ Agenda
It's hardly a new problem on the Internet that one can't delete messages from the past...
Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
> Yea, THERE'S a reputable organization reknown for their datacenters, data integrity, and long-term stayability.
> How long will this service last at SpyMac? A month?
You don't get it. Spymac don't offer imap or advance search, hence 1Gb is useless there.
Whats the diffrence between Hotmail, Yahoo, Every other free email provider out there And Google..
Nothing, google is just upfront and honest about whats happening to your emails.
They have to "scan" through them to provide virus and spam protection.
They will use there distributed approach to searching to provide fast web based email services. This means your email could be on 100's of there servers at the same time. When you hit delete it might take a while for it to be removed from all systems.
Here a company steps forward and is 100% honest about what they are doing and we flame them.
No wonder we have to deal with lame support and excuses from companys every day.
Personal Website
Again I would imagine that it is your concern whom you send mail to, if you don't trust a mail domain then you should not send mail to it. This is valid not matter what domain you are sending to.
If you are going to argue about the sender not being aware of what is going to happen to their mail remeber that's the same when you send to Hotmail or whatever, it's up to you to read the fine print when you send mail to someone.
Boo hoo!
Somebody call the whaaaaambulance!
First: If you read the EULA before you checked the box, you'd know about how they're going to use the info. So, it's not an invasion of your privacy. You told them they could do it! You 'signed the contract'.
Second: They're not trying to hide what they're doing AT ALL. They should be commended for that. It's stated right there on the main page.
Third: You should know by now that privacy doesn't exist. If you need to hide something, don't hide it on a cheapass server owned by someone else. Get your own co-located box and encrypt your mofo-email! PGP, baby. Or get a Hushmail account.
Fourth: It really is a genius revenue model. Minimally invasive. Text-ads are acceptable. Unlike Hotmail & Yahoo, Gmail won't have any annoying banner ads or pop-ups. That is awesome.
geeks are cats who dig a certain kind of cool
-
If Google terms of service violate European law, it is appropriate for Europe based people to complain.
-
Google listens. If they are taking a wrong turn, it is wise to let them know.
- So, if a company offers to do something illegal to its customers, do you think the company is untouchable, because you are not forced to be its customer ? This is just nonsense.
- Yes, they are honest, and you can probably trust their current management. But what will happen to your personal data in future under new management ?
It's funny. Your same argument has been used to death by microsofties before: what's wrong with microsoft ? Nobody forces to use their products. YeahDumb slashdot gets me all worked up over nothing. Now granted, I suppose I could do things like, read beyond the headline, but, well, it's slashdot.
Anyway, yeah, privacy complaints, sure. For a service that nobody can use yet. You know, I'd like to register a privacy complaint for Duke Nukem Forver, there's some nasty DRM in that. And I think my sky car is bugged with a hidden camera.
You know, I honestly don't know why I'm even typing this crap. I mean, I'm trying to be funny I guess, but ever since they took the funny karma bonus away, you know, what's the point? The Slashdot FAQ tells me that I have to be smart, not just a smart ass. Well, sorry Taco, I don't know how to do that. So I, like the smartass I am, will now click the "Submit" button, and watch my karma cook!
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
Privacy isn't just an issue of "Big Brother." Identity theft is a real concern here in the US.
"More than 27 million Americans have been victims of identity theft in the last five years, a survey released today by the Government estimated, including nearly 10 million in the last year alone. " (Source: NYTimes, September 3, 2003)
"According to the [2003 FTC] survey, 67 percent of the respondents said their credit card accounts had been misused in the past year. Another 19 percent said thieves had tapped into their checking or savings accounts." (Source: NYTimes, September 3, 2003)
"Around 80% of computer crime is committed by 'insiders'. The 20% that is not done by insiders, manage to steal $100 million by some estimates; $1 billion by others." (Source: Web Crime Statistics. www.intergov.org)
Europe has much stricter privacy laws and as a result, they have much less identity fraud. I'd welcome more restrictions in the US about privacy. The bottom line is, Google does business in Europe, and their privacy statement may conflict with their laws...complaint filed.
-
Tech News, Reviews and Tutorials
I felt pretty dumb, having given them my prime email address (myfirstname@mylastname.net), then realising afterwards that through the magic everlasting cookie I had just enabled Google to link every search I had ever done back to ME personally. Like, DUH!
Heck, I don't even know what "interesting" data might be in there, but seeing as it's about ME, I damn well ought to be able to get access to it (under UK law).
More here.
That is what people are getting annoyed about - not the email service itself, just the registration process.
As technology accumulates, the hatred between people tends to decrease. - Steven Pinker
"OK fine. So you don't have a GMail account, but what if you send mail to one?"
Additionally, it won't actually be that easy to tell if you are sending to a gmail.com domain. For example I own my own domain and simply redirect email to my ISP email account rather than pay for email hosting. So if you send email to any of my email addresses (something @ mydomain.com) you have no idea where it is actually going. Not currently to any webmail service, but in the future, who knows?