Slashdot Mirror


Hiding From Google

penguinrecorder writes "Google offers Web users a simple trade-off: Let the search giant track a substantial portion of your comings and goings around the Web, and it will offer you a free, superior online experience. Now independent security researcher Moxie Marlinspike is making Web users a counter-offer: take Google's giveaways and keep your privacy too. On Tuesday, Marlinspike launched a service he calls GoogleSharing, a plug-in for Firefox designed to give users access to Google's online offerings while cloaking their identity from the company's data collection tools. By hosting a proxy server with a collection of Google 'identities,' the privacy software will allow users temporarily to route their traffic through another computer that masks their identity by mixing their online actions with those of other users. The system is totally transparent, with no special 'alternative' websites to visit. Your normal work flow should be exactly the same." GoogleSharing only works for those services not requiring a Google login; for the latter, no proxying is done.

19 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory Onion by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 4, Funny

    They've had an opt out option for a long time.

    --
    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
  2. And we're trusting you because.... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In Google we trust. In Moxie Marlinspike who wants to be in a position to collect all our Google non-logged-in content... nope.

    1. Re:And we're trusting you because.... by natehoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My thoughts exactly. It's free, so he's gotta be paying for it somehow, right? Or is he a known philanthropist who has a long track record of protecting privacy? Nope, didn't think so.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:And we're trusting you because.... by cstec · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you trust Google, great, but don't say "we". Google's changed - a lot. Given the breaches, and their relentless march of ever more invasive monitoring on every device and platform they can get their fingers into, I trust this random stranger more than Google. Google is a proven risk, this guy's just a potential one.

    3. Re:And we're trusting you because.... by a1terego · · Score: 5, Informative

      Google is a proven risk, this guy's just a potential one.

      This is misleading statement. Simple risk analysis: Google is a KNOWN risk with very substantial assets to lose if they screw up. This guy is an UNKNOWN risk with (presumably) a lot less to lose.

    4. Re:And we're trusting you because.... by Anachragnome · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "How is Google invasive?"

      Have you ever used the NoScript extension for Firefox? Have you ever paid attention to what NoScript is blocking?

      I'd say that 80-90% of the websites I end up at have at least www.google-analytics.com or www.google.com trying to run script. I'd call the unauthorized running of script on my computer invasive. Regardless of what they say to the contrary, I have not given them permission to run script on my computer, and have had to resort to actions to prevent it.

      Learned use of NoScript is probably THE best way (even better with ABP and a harsh cookie policy) of making sure that Google does not have you in their evil clutches.

      And, it is free. As in beer.

    5. Re:And we're trusting you because.... by webreaper · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Unauthorized running of scripts on my computer"?

      By visiting the site, you authorised it. If you don't want those scripts run, don't visit the site.

      It's a bit like saying "unauthorised filming of me by CCTV when I walk into a branch of Sainsburys". If you don't like it, you can do the other thing.

  3. "Don't trust Google, trust me!" by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Instead of sending your private information to Google directly, use my awesome proxy server to send your private information to Google anonymously. I promise I will not snoop any more than Google does!"

    1. Re:"Don't trust Google, trust me!" by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 5, Funny

      1. Setup proxy for paranoids
      2. Data mine the search habits of paranoids
      3. ????
      4. Profit!

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
  4. Proxy is overkill by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Informative

    www.optimizegoogle.com Tick most stuff, especially remove click tracking.

    There, now Google knows what I search for, but never which link I clicked.

  5. Why by cosm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is it me, or has Google started to slide in the media towards away from its 'Don't Be Evil' policy? Personally, I think they operate well within moral bounds, but to a lot of major networks, blogs, and news aggregates, the opposite seems to be opines.

    In principle, most want their usage statistics retained for a short-while, if at all. Most prefer their statistics only confided with first channel of contact as well. Are people considering that these mass usage statistics may comprise some of the magic that makes their platform so successful and useful? Continual refinement due to constant sources of usage information, IMO, seems to be working great for them. The naysayers neigh, but until I see a genuine effort by other companies to be as philanthropic, open-source friendly, charitable, and hospitable, I will shelve my skepticism and contempt for their nosiness in hopes of a continually great service.

    How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model? If all those in favor of eliminating usage-statistics completely had their way, Ad-Words and dynamic advertising content would be out, and these search giants would be looking for another form of revenue. Something to think about...

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    1. Re:Why by kestasjk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not a big Google-privacy-paranoia guy, but my faith in them had been on the decline, and their recent China thing has definitely bought them some credibility in my eyes. It's easy to have a knee-jerk cynical reaction to it, but it may well show that they really are still putting principles before profits, and that their "Don't Be Evil" motto is more than a quirky relic of their early days.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  6. Would you pay for Google ad-free? by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google runs an ad network because it makes money. They still honor their "Don't be evil" promises, but they've got to do some user tracking because that makes ads more valuable. If you took advertising away from Google... how would they make money? Would anybody pay Google to not show ads to them?

    1. Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free? by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Informative

      And you wonder what the asterisk in my header line means?

    2. Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free? by bertoelcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would pay for a Google subscription service with no ads and no user activity tracking.

      How would they know it was you they would not show ads to unless they tracked you?

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    3. Re:Would you pay for Google ad-free? by Vegeta99 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You dont have to pay, just have good enough Karma =)

  7. Re:Who has to use Google? by b4k3d+b34nz · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not really...Google just offers you a unified experience. Bing has better Travel and Maps search. Yahoo has a generally better mail UI/client, as well as a huge database of Q&A. Ask has better contextual search and a butler. 30 Boxes is a better calendar Flickr is far better than Picasa, and has a better community Zimbra is just plain better than pretty much anything that Google Docs has to offer (which isn't much) Wordpress is more advanced, feature-rich, and easier to use than Blogger Netvibes is a lot less buggy than Google Reader, and provides a better interface (Please note, these are the general consumer products. Many of the business services and tools are far better than the competition) But, most people are lazy and would rather just go to google.com.

    --
    Grammar Lesson: you're is a contraction of "you are"; your means you possess something; yore means days gone by.
  8. Woody Woodpecker says, Use Tor + SSL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Download, install, properly configure Tor:
    https://www.torproject.org/

    Certainly you should choose an open source and free operating system to
    increase your security/privacy: http://www.distrowatch.com/

    Use one of the many tools available to build your own Linux liveCD/DVD/USB
    with Tor installed/configured and yank out all of your HDDs or unplug them
    while using Tor via Linux liveCD/DVD/USB, then while running Tor:

    Scroogle SSL:
    https://ssl.scroogle.org/

    and for mail:

    Safe-Mail:
    No cookies, no script, no java, no flash required!
    https://www.safe-mail.net/

    In the words of Woody Woodpecker:
    Hah ha ha HAH ha, Hah ha ha HAH ha, HAHAHAHHAHAHHAAH!

    Fuck you corporations, fuck you snoopers, I do it MY WAY.

  9. He stole my idea! by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I offer the same service - and more. I'll route your google/msn/yahoo/windows live/banking/ebay through tor for you. You can inspect the code for my tor client and proxy (Open Source of course). Hell I'll even offer SSL and HTTPS - both ways. Opt out on the banking data too!