Google Reader Begins Sharing Private Data

Felipe Hoffa writes "One week ago Google Reader's team decided to begin showing your private data to all your GMail contacts. No need to opt-in, no way to opt-out. Complaints haven't been answered. Some users share their problems, including one family who says they won't be able to enjoy this Christmas because of this 'feature.' Will Google start doing this with all their products? You can check a summary of complaints in my journal here or browse the whole thread in Google Groups."

Comments

Tempest in a Teapot

[X]

I'm sorry, but I'm with Google on this one. I was using Reader for a while after it was activated before I noticed it. It shares exactly what I expect with exactly who I expect. I've been using it for about a week now and I haven't felt like there was any violation of privacy.

Re:Tempest in a Teapot

[jmccay]

FUD? Really? Seriously, this does point out a drawback with using online applications. You are trusting your data to a foreign entity that may not even reside in the country. Then you can split hairs by having the company in the country and the servers in a different country that has laws more to their liking. Nothing is to stop the company from publishing your data. If I were someone important, like a politician, I would not use yahoo or google email. To dangerous. I will stick to my plain old desktop readers thank you. I know where that data is stored and usually I can control the updates.

Re:Tempest in a Teapot

[tedrlord]

This is a problem, and it's simple and obvious if you look at it. Previously, you shared items, and your friends who knew the page could follow along. Now, you share items, and everyone who chat with or email you have that list right in front of them. Sure, your boss or mother in law could have previously searched around a while and probably found your shared list, but that violates social boundaries on their part, and you have reason to take issue with them for tracking your personal information online.

Now, if they use Reader, they have a list right in front of them of all your interests, just like you have a list in front of you of theirs. If you're into BDSM, new earth creationism, or even (god help me) square dance, it takes a click for them to find out. If that was the original intent of the service, then it's your own damn fault, but beforehand Google put some effort into making it non-obvious to find your page if you didn't know where to look. You didn't have full security, but at least you had the "Why the hell were you tracking down all my personal information at 2am last night, you weirdo?" defense if they went that far.

At first, I figured that Google entering into the social networking market was going to be a big move in their favor, and that they'd blow away the competition, but something like this makes me think that the "social" part is probably beyond their reach. I guess that's what you get when all their technology is designed by 20-somethings that live under their desks at the Googleplex.

(An aside, I live within walking distance from Google, and when you go to the Safeway on Shoreline you can actually pick out all the Google-types. Skinny young guys traveling in twos or threes, talking slightly quietly and huddled together. The fact that more often than not they're wearing Google t-shirts helps.)

A big mistake at a critical moment

[Janos421]

It's quite a surprising mistake from Google, particularly when the merge with Double-Click "brings greater focus on privacy". Even if they claim that they fix some problems and offer more control to users, they could have make these fix before launching the service... but it's a beta. That's what you risk when you use free beta services.

Furthermore, it is a good example of privacy lack of consideration, and it offers a good argument to privacy defenders. In addition, it highlights the fact that every service offered per Google potentially involves privacy problems. In fact, like Google, I wouldn't have believed that GReader data were so sensitive. And once again, it proves that privacy matters only when you lost it.

So far, we used anonymity to protect privacy, but in that case... proxies are useless. How can we protect privacy against such threats? One solution is to use obfuscation: generating noise (for instance, subscribing to additional RSS flows that we'll never read) in our profile so neither Google, nor our gmail contact can find out which are the RSS flows we are really reading. This assumes that the obfuscation mechanism let only the user know to which flows it really subscribed.

I don't think such mechanism exists now for Greader, but I'm developing a FF plug-in (http://squigglesr.free.fr) to protect search privacy using obfuscation. Keywords are extracting from your favorite RSS flows (for example the one you subscribed in greader) to generate personalized queries. It's quite similar to TrackMeNot (which also use obfuscation), but I'm trying to make less noise but make it more coherent (a good comparison is trying to make lot of noise around what you say, or simply mix some coherent conversations).

Don't bring an internet to a pissing match

[MrLint]

So I went looking for how this ruined x-mas for someone and found the link.

It seems like to me that what started out as something that was shared turned into a pissing match between already barely tolerating each other family members. I fault this summary because intentional escalation of individuals is *not* the fault of google (or anyone other than the parties involved.

This would have been disastrous for me.

[Satevis]

I'm relieved that I don't use Reader. If I did, I would probably have been sharing atheist and NSFW articles with my spouse and some close friends. I work in politics, and if that stuff had gotten out to other people on my contact lists, my career would have been over. I don't trust Google anymore.

Re:This would have been disastrous for me.

[Satevis]

For goodness' sake, didn't you people read what I wrote? My spouse and close friends know what I think of religion. It's the OTHER people on my contact list that I would be worried about. And, I don't lie about my non-faith. I just try not to insult people.

Re:I never "got" GMail

[Schlemphfer]

>I never "got" why people fell all over themselves about GMail and getting a GMail account.

Maybe you don't know how terrific GMail's feature set now is. It has been steadily improving, and some recent additions give it compelling advantages over your current setup.

You said you own your own domain that you use for your email account. Did you know that you can now forward all your email to Gmail, enjoy the benefits of a superb spam filter, and then use either Gmail's excellent web interface or an IMAP client? Did you know that you can now use Google to have your default return address be your custom domain name, so nobody even knows your using GMail? Did you know that GMail offers unlimited filters, so that every time some clown decides to add you to his BCC "Ron Paul 2008" list, you can click the filter button and never, ever hear from him again?

All of this is free. Like you I have my own domain -- but Gmail's excellent suite of services is too useful to miss out on.

Uhh I don't get it...

[nullhero]

Per Google Reader Group they are only sharing the information that you asked them to share. And only with those that you have used Google Talk. I share things in Google Reader because I want other people to know what I'm reading, and what I find interesting. No where is there any private data, unless you count the profile that you create, which you can limit the amount of data that you place on that.

Google isn't sharing any private user data. If you don't want to share anything then don't click the share icon.

Re:Why would you in the first place?

[gorbachev]

"I don't know why anyone would store anything important or personally sensitive anywhere on the internet anyway,"

Because in this case the personally sensitive information is information about your interests and opinions that you may have selected to share only with a select few people, because you trust those people.

However, Google has now decided to, without your express permission, share that same information with EVERYONE on your GMail contact list, which, I'm sure everyone knows, includes people who you may not even know.

Now, imagine that you're a US Marine, who happens to be gay. You're using Google Reader to subscribe to a few RSS feeds about gay lifestyle. Your GMail contact list has many of your gay friends, and also many of your fellow marines, maybe including your superiors. You have chosen to share your gay lifestyle RSS feeds with your gay friends. However, since Dec 14th all your fellow Marines will also know about your gay lifestyle RSS feeds.

I'm sure you're aware of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy? The Marine just lost his/her job.

Just because someone dopehead at Google doesn't understand simple social networking concepts such as trust. It is a monumental screwup from Google's part.