Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Reader Begins Sharing Private Data

Posted by kdawson on from the thought-it-was-your-data-eh dept.

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."

13 of 313 comments (clear)

  1. Tempest in a Teapot by X · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    --
    sigs are a waste of space
    1. Re:Tempest in a Teapot by X · · Score: 4, Informative

      Dude, it is only sharing articles that you clicked on the "share" icon for, and only with your contacts. If you never click on the share icon, nobody sees anything.

      This isn't one of those international conglomerate conspiracy theories.

      --
      sigs are a waste of space
    2. Re:Tempest in a Teapot by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But he brings up a valid point. When ever you trust something to the whims of someone else, expect them to be the keeper of it, not you. There were plenty of people who shared with a few people under the assumption that only a few people saw it. When others in the contact list started seeing it, it created problems for them. Why? Because google at their whim change how something worked and people had the ability to access something though you that you didn't count on.

      And this goes with on line documents or anything. If they change the policy because of whatever and catch you off guard, your shit out of luck. BTW, if you were a closet homo, would you want you mom and dad to see that you were sharing Gay Marriage articles with your lovers? I mean this as minor as you might think, reaches far beyond simple arguments about who cares. It goes to exemplify why you shouldn't trust anything to another person or company that can make a number of changes without notifying you.

  2. Ok right.... by Phil246 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ive just had a quick check.
    There is a shared items area in my google reader, however none of my feeds are listed in there.

    that is to say - they are not shared by default.
    Granted, the feature is there but its hardly invading my privacy without me having a say in what can and cannot be displayed - and by default for me nothing is.
    1. Re:Ok right.... by ironfrost · · Score: 5, Informative

      The summary is somewhat misleading - what people are complaining about is that items in the 'shared items' area are now shared with all your gmail contacts (which automatically includes anyone with a gmail account that you have sent an email to), rather than having to manually add contacts as before.

  3. Don't bring an internet to a pissing match by MrLint · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  4. Shared items are not private by cheebie · · Score: 5, Funny

    The laws of physics have begun exposing all of your private items to the world. In a stunning turn of events, it has been discovered that if you place things on your front lawn with a gigantic sign saying "Look at me!", people can freely see them.

    "This is outrageous", screamed Peter P Hysterical on the same forum where he documents every nanosecond of his life. "There's no opt out procedure, there's no whitelisting. It's just everyone looking at all the stuff I've decided to share."

    God, responding to inquiries said, "Look, if you don't want people to see your stuff, put it inside. I created walls for a reason."

  5. Misleading article by BlizzardandBlaze · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...No need to opt-in, no way to opt-out...

    Not exactly. According to Google:

    "You can hide items from any friend you don't want to see, and you can also opt out of sharing by removing all your shared items."

  6. Yahoo?? by Locklin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    as things stand now I prefer having my email on yahoo/google than on a personal domain just for this reason.

    So you don't mind Yahoo pasting spam into your outgoing emails? Those little ads at the bottom of your emails from Yahoo (and msn) users are rather annoying. It's one thing to pay for the service by viewing ads, but it's another to pay for it by spamming non-users.

    --
    "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
  7. The issue is a change in semantics by ai2097 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As many readers have commented, this does not seem like such a big deal. Shared stuff being public? Who cares? Don't do it, ya morons! And so on.

    I don't use GMail, or Google's reader. However, from TFA and the complaints, it appears as though there was a service where you could aggregate and re-publish feeds through a link that was not (automatically) published anywhere. Google changed the semantics of this, to mean that these "shared" feeds are now automatically available to everyone in your contact list. This (rightfully) has pissed off many existing users, who have invested their time into a system that they must now abandon, because most people have the concept of "mixed company." You don't talk about certain topics in certain groups -- you might be fine making dirty jokes around your regular friends, for example, but you behave yourself when you're at a professional lunch.

    So, this is not a matter of not using it -- it's a matter of bait-and-switch. The rules got changed out from under the user's feet, and that leads to a feeling of betrayal in the case where embarrassing information gets leaked. Google gave the impression that you were just hanging out with your friends, and then let in your stuffy colleagues while you were in the middle of telling The Aristocrats Joke.

  8. Re:I don't get it by X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For this scenario to play out, you'd have to click on "share" an article from these feeds. Free advice: if you are worried about privacy, don't click on things that say "share". If you do, you might want to unclick them quickly.

    --
    sigs are a waste of space
  9. headline should read... by pavera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google Reader begins sharing public data in a new way.

    These were not "private" feeds, they were publicly available URLs (although obfuscated).

    I'm not necessarily siding with Google on this one. I do think they should have thought this change of functionality out a little more, but the fact remains this data was already public. Comparing it to the Beacon scandal is not accurate at all.

  10. Sounds like fun for the whole family ;) by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Funny

    BTW, if you were a closet homo, would you want you mom and dad to see that you were sharing Gay Marriage articles with your lovers?


    Heh. This sounds like it could be fun, actually, and I'm not even gay. I'm almost tempted to finally get a GMail account and start sharing some gay stuff just to see if mom will try to give me advice about _that_ too.

    Hmm, actually, now I'm getting even better ideas. Do they have some feeds about, dunno, bestiality or such?
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.