Slashdot Mirror


Google Using DoubleClick Tracking Cookies

dstates sends news coming out of the letters the House Energy and Commerce Committee sent to a number of broadband and Internet companies about their policies and practices on user tracking. The committee has now made public 25 responses to its queries, and many companies, including Google, acknowledge using targeted-advertising technology without explicitly informing customers. The Committee is considering legislation to require explicitly informing the consumer of the type of information being gathered and any intent to use it for a different purpose, and a right to say "no" to the collection or use. The submitter notes that, while Google denies using deep packet inspection, if the traffic is a Google search or email to or from a Gmail account, Google does not need DPI to see the contents of the message. "The revelations came in response to a bipartisan inquiry of how more Internet companies have gathered data on customers. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) said 'Increasingly, there are no limits technologically as to what a company can do in terms of collecting information... and then selling it as a commodity to other providers.' Some companies like NebuAd have tested deep-packet inspection with some broadband providers Knology and Cable One. Google said that it had begun to use the DoubleClick ad-serving cookie that allow the tracking of Web surfing across different sites but said it was not using deep packet inspection. Google promotes the fact that its merger with DoubleClick provides advertisers 'insight into the number of people who have seen an ad campaign,' as well as 'how many users visited their sites after seeing an ad.' Microsoft and Yahoo acknowledge the use of behavioral targeting. Yahoo says it allows users to turn off targeted advertising on its Web sites; Microsoft has not yet responded to the committee."

22 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Solution: Opera by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. Turn off cookies globally.
    2. Turn on cookies for sites that need it by hitting F12 and hitting 'Accept cookes only from the site I visit'.

    Done. No more doubleclick cookies.

  2. Why is this news? by vtavares · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did anyone really believe Google wasn't doing this?

  3. And slashdot uses doubleclick & google-analyti by viking80 · · Score: 4, Informative

    And slashdot uses doubleclick & google-analytics as well.

    Try disabling scripts with firefox "noScript". I think /. is more readable without allowing doubleclick.net & google-analytics.com

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
  4. Not a problem by gamanimatron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ahem. STOP SPENDING MY TAX DOLLARS ON THIS CRAP.

    Anyone using a computer who doesn't understand why they shouldn't accept all cookies and scripts and click on everything shiny deserves (yes, really!) to have their actions remotely monitored and the resulting data sold to the highest bidder.

    I don't want to drown in regulation just because some idiots can't be bothered to pull their collective head out before they use their systems.

    --
    cogito ergo dubito
  5. Ummm by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ummm, isn't this exactly what we would expect them to do with all that information? The only people who should be surprised by this are the ones who have no idea how the internet works. That said, there are plenty of workarounds, including limiting accepted cookies only to sites you specify, or having your browser clear everything out upon closing. Sure it doesn't totally fix the problem (assuming you consider it a problem), but it certainly does limit the amount of tracking they can do.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
  6. A missprint in its mission statment. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Don't Do Eval". not "Don't Do Evil". The guys at Google wanted to make sure all the employees wouldn't use the eval command to create possible security holes by executing string.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  7. Opt out if you're worried by SiliconEntity · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google makes it easy to opt out of the doubleclick tracking cookie:

    http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html

    "Anyone may opt out of the DoubleClick cookie (for both the Google content network and DoubleClick ad serving) at any time by clicking the button above."

    1. Re: Opt out if you're worried by rs232 · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Google makes it easy to opt out of the doubleclick tracking cookie"

      Or you could put doubleclick.net & google-analytics.com in your hosts file and point the entries to 127.0.0.1 The advertisers still don't get it, intrusive adverts like on television don't work on the Internet

      --
      davecb5620@gmail.com
  8. Disingenuous much? by BobMcD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find it ironic that this government, who greedily gobbles up vast volumes of data at every opportunity, would be barking up this tree.

    1. Re:Disingenuous much? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Do as I say, don't do as I do".

      It's not just for religion anymore.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Not the same by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google's targeted advertisements seems reasonable; When you decide to use their free services, you should know that advertising is a part of the deal.

    Broadband providers using DPI, on the other hand, is like the USPS opening your private mail and then profiting off of what they learn about you. It's all about the expectation of privacy. Broadband providers need to transfer bits and stay out of the content business. If they start doing this, there will be no way to use the internet with any modicum of privacy.

  10. And Doubleclick doesn't need DPI either... by nweaver · · Score: 4, Informative

    You see, they don't just get the cookie, they also get the referrer field, so Google doesn't just get to see that it is "Nicholas Weaver" who's surfing the web, but can see that I am composing a reply to this article, because the referrer field in the doubleclick adds and google analytics on slashdot allow them to know this!

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  11. Solution: Options by bunratty · · Score: 5, Informative

    Or use Firefox and uncheck Accept third-party cookies in the Privacy Options. Or use Internet Explorer and block third-party cookies. Or use Safari and disallow third-party cookies. I don't see any reason to switch browsers just to access a basic feature.

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    1. Re:Solution: Options by beckerist · · Score: 3, Informative
  12. Evil... by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems like DoubleClick is Google's evil twin. When Google wants to get something using "do no evil" it is Google, if they want to do something that is evil, they use DoubleClick

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  13. An observation by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe it's just me, but has anyone else noticed the pattern of a roughly daily "Google invades your privacy" story?

    I'm not saying they're accurate or not: for all I know it's just an astroturfing campaign. It's just a significant trend around here.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  14. Re:But But ... by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 5, Funny

    >> their motto is "Don't be evil"
     
    ...where "don't be" approaches "be" for some values of evil.

  15. But isn't Google already opt-in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    while Google denies using deep packet inspection, if the traffic is a Google search or email to or from a Gmail account, Google does not need DPI to see the contents of the message.
    ..
    Markey said he and his colleagues plan to introduce legislation next year, a sort of online-privacy Bill of Rights, that would require that consumers must opt in to the tracking of their online behavior and the collection and sharing of their personal data.

    Isn't DELIBERATELY having all your email intentionally sent to Google, about as opt-in as things can get? We have known all along that Google reads the email that the users opt to have sent to them.

    I am starting to really get pissed off at the weirdo "modern" privacy movement. It used to be that we worried someone was watching us. But now we're taking active steps to push our "private" information into other people's faces, while still expecting them to not pay attention to what we are giving them. It's starting to get really absurd.

    The first step to protecting your privacy isn't to regulate the spies. No, the first step is to stop cooperating with the spies. If you won't take that step, then your privacy obviously doesn't mean jack shit to you, so quit crying to the government to do something about it.

    Stop sending I-looked-at-this-webpage packets to doubleclick. Stop sending your private email to Google, and stop sending your search requests to Google. You are giving them this stuff. You fucking opted in.

  16. Re:Solution: about:config, not Options by Kargan · · Score: 3, Informative

    The developers of Firefox removed the option to disable third party cookies in Firefox 2.0 and later, stating the reason that it was not possible to block all third party cookies with this function.

    There are basically two options to disable third party cookies in Firefox 2 versions.

    The first would be to disable it manually by opening about:config from the address bar. Search for network.cookie.cookieBehavior and take a look a the value. If it is set to 0 you accept all cookies, 1 means you only accept cookies from the same server, 2 means you disable all cookies. Setting it to 1 has the same effect that the option in the old firefox browsers had: it disables third party cookies.

    You could install an add-on as well that blocks third party cookies. One of the many extensions that does that is called CookieSafe. This one makes it possible to disable all cookies and allow them only for specific sites (whitelist).

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
  17. Re:Solution: about:config, not Options by bakuun · · Score: 4, Informative

    They added the function again in firefox 3.0, so it is again possible to block third-party cookies without any extensions or other software than just a fresh firefox installation.

  18. Re:And slashdot uses doubleclick & google-anal by christefano · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't forget these, too:

    127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com
    127.0.0.1 ssl.google-analytics.com

    While you're at it:

    127.0.0.1 doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 www.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ads.doubleclick.com
    127.0.0.1 ads.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad2.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad3.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad4.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad5.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad6.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad7.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad8.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 ad9.doubleclick.net

  19. CustomizeGoogle by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's CustomizeGoogle, a Greasemonkey script which will, among other things, randomize the replies to Google's cookies. Unfortunately, it's rather slow, and may result in Javascript "script running too long" errors. Right idea, though.