Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Claims Google Chrome Steals Your Privacy
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft is going on the offensive against Google, accusing the search giant of creating a browser that does not respect user privacy. The company posted a video, embedded below, on TechNet Edge with the following description: 'Watch a demo on how Google Chrome collects every keystroke you make and how Internet Explorer 8 keeps your information private through two address bars and In Private browsing.' Microsoft's first criticism is Chrome's combining the address bar and the search box into a single entry box; IE8 keeps those fields separate. 'By keeping these boxes separate, your privacy is better protected and the addresses of the sites you're visiting aren't automatically shared with Microsoft, or anyone else,' says IE product manager Pete LePage."
Pete LePage is spot on with this. The privacy intrusion by Chrome is outstanding. Every key you type to the address bar is sent to Google. Your Chrome installation has an personal UI number to track where you downloaded Chrome from, wherever you use it and how you use it.
I am still surprised how many people (even here on our geeky slashdot group who should know better) choose something based on it being offered for free, no matter what happens to their privacy. The same people who complain about casual people using Facebook and how much information they're putting there, and not realizing how much privacy they are losing by using Google's free products and search engine.
It's a known fact that every software needs to be funded in some way. Personally I rather choose a paid solution where I know my privacy wont be lost and I can save documents, emails, etc on my own hard drive instead of relying on cloud computing and all the marketing and privacy intrusion to make it possible. After all Google is a marketing company while Microsoft is an software company. The fact they're doing business by selling me a product instead of whoring to advertisers kind of shows that.
Even if Chrome -was- violating your privacy, why switch to IE? Especially when there is Firefox... Myself I don't like using Chrome because it is not customizable the way Firefox is. You can't even change history settings on Chrome!
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Let me introduce you to Mr Kettle. But, you two should be very well acquainted by now anyway.
If this is the best MS can do then they need to work on their game. I expect the whole MS/Apple/Google wars to get ugly.
Google wants to know everything you do. from the user opinions i've read about the Nexus One it sounds like Google is doing the same thing there. Along with Google Wave. they want to know everything you type in and keep a record of it
"By keeping these boxes separate, your privacy is better protected"
Umm, the boxes are all controlled by the same program, so whether or not there is physical separation between them (does that have any meaning in a user interface?) has nothing to do with whether or not the data is collected or not.
This guy is a product manager?
Did you not read TFA at all ? You can not only choose which search provider to use the search suggestions, you can also turn off search suggestions in chrome !!
Wait a minute. I'm a manager, and I've been reading a lot of case studies and watching a lot of webcasts about The Cloud. Based on all of this glorious marketing literature, I, as a manager, have absolutely no reason to doubt the safety of any data put in The Cloud.
The case studies all use words like "secure", "MD5", "RSS feeds" and "encryption" to describe the security of The Cloud. I don't know about you, but that sounds damn secure to me! Some Clouds even use SSL and HTTP. That's rock solid in my book.
And don't forget that you have to use Web Services to access The Cloud. Nothing is more secure than SOA and Web Services, with the exception of perhaps SaaS. But I think that Cloud Services 2.0 will combine the tiers into an MVC-compliant stack that uses SaaS to increase the security and partitioning of the data.
My main concern isn't with the security of The Cloud, but rather with getting my Indian team to learn all about it so we can deploy some first-generation The Cloud applications and Web Services to provide the ultimate platform upon which we can layer our business intelligence and reporting, because there are still a few verticals that we need to leverage before we can move to The Cloud 2.0.
Meh!
I don't care. I know the deal with Google. Everyone knows the deal with Google - they mine your data so they can target ads, you get useful software.
I don't mind Google's targeted ads so I feel no need for a tinfoil hat over this one.
If Google were trying to break into my bank account, I'd be worried, but I don't fear non-obtrusive advertising.
Has anyone ever tried to implment the Microsoft privacy policy? Here is one guy who did.
I use Chrome under Linux simply because the fonts look beautiful. I also never type stuff into the address bar - that's what all my bookmarks are for. When I actually am looking for something I use, tada, Google anyway. I am fully connected to a whole wack of Google services so I'm sure they know everything I do. So what. Google is benevolent and any information that could actually be used against you will be gathered anyway by someone with the motivation and resources no matter what browser you use. Now if I get a shiver up my spine I go into the tools menu and choose: "Incognito Window" and for every keystroke being entered into the address bar you can turn that off as well by turning off the suggestion service. So, if you don't use it correctly when privacy matters to you then there are privacy concerns. If you change the convenient settings the privacy concerns go away. Harping on Chrome for its suggestion features is a straw-man, if you want to talk real privacy issues then you talk about Cloud services themselves and laws about whether or not warrants are needed for them and also under privacy you talk about how easily compromised the browser is to leak your information. The address bar and suggestion services are just cross-camp sniping: they are easily changed to what you value if you have half a brain cell. Marketing.
Shh.
http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php
Iron's makers claim to block the Chrome privacy issues without sacrificing speed. I've been using it since a windows upgrade killed Firefox on all my machines.
Iron seems to work fine, but I'm not privacy savvy enough to claim it solves the issues raised here.
Gosh, who knew.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
All of these settings are hidden in the advanced settings dialog
Bullshit. The search provider option is right on the first options tab. The search suggestions option is at the very top on the last tab (there are only 3 tabs), under the big blue "Privacy" label. Don't damage your own case by exaggerating the facts.
If you search for everything with google anyways this shouldn't worry you. If you send data to your ISP unencrypted which almost everyone does you shouldn't be too worried. If you allow cookies this shouldn't really bug you. If you use facebook/myspace or some regular social media you shouldn't care at all. I'm sure there is a long list of other crap invading your privacy as well. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I agree with MS. Just, there is lots of crap data mining you, live with it or become a hermit. Not a ton of other options.
Chrome actually has a bunch of fine-grain privacy controls they added in the last release.
http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/more/privacy.html
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
As somebody who personally knows people working on Chrome, I can assure you that data mining was not the goal of Chrome. Most engineers at Google are sincerely trying to make the Web a better place. That this actually helps Google is just a bonus for them.
If a joke is told and no one gets it, does it WHOOSH?
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
Let's try to think clearly here.
Microsoft seems to be saying that you have more privacy when you type a URL into their address bar.
But that just means that your DNS server is now the "evil" thing that knows every place you've visited.
And of course your ISP can trap every URL you access.
So if you use Microsoft's model, you've just hidden from Google, but still exposed to your perhaps Ma and Pa ISP and DNS providers.
another web page.
I've read the title of the summary, and dismissed it as an especially smelly load of swine shit. Every browser has it's own issues, and the user should be familiar with them. Yeah, all the browsers tend to keep records that are unnecessary. All the browsers tend to report data that is unnecessary, to websites, to developers, to the authors, if left on default settings.
But, for MICROSOFT to point fingers is just preposterous.
Maybe they can try again in 10 years, after they've created a clearly superior browser. I mean, CLEARLY superior to anything else on the market. When those of us who really dislike and/or hate microsoft HAVE to admit that their browser is at least as good as any of the competition, THEN MS can find fault with the competition.
Wait - did I say "10 years"? Hmmmmmm. More than likely, browsers will be obsolete before Microsoft makes the browser that is clearly superior to any competition that can be found.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
So, if I get this right... when you use Chrome, you're in risk that it will track your every Google search, your every Gmail mail, your every YouTube video, your every Blogger comment, your every Google Groups post, your every Picasa picture, your every visit on sites using Google Analytics, and while we're at it, they also have a deal with Twitter to get your every tweet and they crawled your every website page.
In short, Google got you long before you started using Chrome. Using any other browser. You may as well relax and enjoy it.
Raising awareness of Chrome's issues is a good thing, but I think those of us who deal with security, corporate secrets and so on knew that long before someone else had to tell us, and have procedures in place on how to securely query and exchange information. The mainstream web was never exactly a very "privacy minded" medium. I use Chrome for casual browsing and install it for friends and relatives. There's nothing Chrome would give away for those people that Google didn't already have from their other sources.
What's so hard to understand about this problem? Most users want to use suggestions only for their searches, not URLs they enter. Chrome only allows toggling suggestions for both.
To add to that, what is to stop a software vendor (MS) from simply gathering the information typed into ANY field in a browser. Whether they are in a combo field or not is irrelevant. What a ridiculous argument.
Just when you think you've seen everything from Microsoft they go and outdo themselves. They really are a bunch of obnoxious motherfuckers, who wouldn't know quality or taste if it slapped them in their monkey-dancing faces.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Unless you go to Preferences->Advanced and turn off the appropriate option in the Privacy category.
/. didn't see that option? I saw only a comment or two mentioning that.
Or am I missing something major here? Is it possible that most people on
All of these settings are hidden in the advanced settings dialog
They aren't hidden, they're quite visible. 3 clicks show you them.
Earlier that day at Microsoft...
"Hey Pete, we can't get the combined search and address bar to work properly"
"Hmm. Ok, don't worry, we'll just spin it as a security feature".
The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.
At least on the OS X version...
Preferences -> Under the Hood -> Uncheck "Use a suggestion service to help complete searches and URLs typed in the address bar"
So Chrome is a keylogger. Most of the new commercial stuff probably is. Nobody seems to care enough to do some deep checking...
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
They (M$) do collect this information locally if you have form auto-completion. But they don't send anywhere, unlike google.
It's useless. Most Slashdotters have their heads so far up Google's ass, nothing you say will reach their ears. This is a company that indexes everything forever, including your email and IM conversations. It gets praised as some "open source company" when its main product--its search engine and advertising platform--is as closed as Windows. It only uses open source products to get people onto its proprietary advertising platform.
That's not true, if they wanted to keep it anonymous, they wouldn't send session cookie with each request. Yet they do. Session id is not required for auto-suggestions.
Once again they don't just receive everything you type in address bar, they also associate it with your session.
You can un-check the option to use the auto-completion suggestion service for anything you type in the omnibox. Its under Options->Under the hood. At least, that's the case for the latest beta releases. I just started using Chrome and have only used the latest beta software, which is extremely stable.
Just because you have what you think are sins, doesn't mean Google is going to judge you, that's not profitable after all.
For some purposes there's nothing more evil than someone who intends to 'do good', by shaming people who sin according to their definition.
Now if you were contemplating something illegal, yeah, there might be some reasons to worry.... in theory Google could be ordered by the courts to report all information to law enforcement, then you would be at a disadvantage, since they have every keystroke.
actually as someone who has researched this , Microsoft are actually correct, and Google are the bad guys here, sorry to break it to you, but whats the difference between a company worth $billions and $slightly less Billions, so exactly why do you trust Google more than Microsoft, did Ms rob your house last and torture your kitten, I see nothing but sheep here at slashdot, i fear google far more than MS,IBM or Apple (last one open to debate). time for a new search engine as that's all they really do and it been crap since 2002.btw i do respect there stance on China
You mean via the same mechanism where you type information into 'Bing', and then 'Bing' responds with your search results?
Most people don't type in 100 character URL's (I don't know of any) they either have it bookmarked, or they search for it via, you guess it, the search engine like Google, Bing, or whatnot.
I refuse to taint my shiny computer with that invasive Microsoft crap.
Seeing as Silverlight is noted for its unsafe privacy-compromising characteristics.
Looks like Microsoft is serious about pushing this FUD. If you search for Chrome on TechNet it'll list a bunch of results tagged with "Google Chrome steals your privacy", but when you click through on the links there is no mention of Chrome. See for yourself at http://edge.technet.com/Search/Default.aspx?Term=chrome
That's a fine, legitimate argument. It becomes bullshit when you start suggesting that the options are "hidden in the advanced settings dialog" instead of just right there in the options menu. I'm just protesting the exaggeration.
also Chrome crashes more than IE, how on earth is that possible, lucky i don't want a job with google, ive met them they like the stepford wive's, scary. BTW that what we called google people when they used to visit my previous company
Yes, bYOUR COMPUTER IS INFECTEDecause Internet Explorer 8 is so g34 OBJECTS FOUNDreat with privacy and seWARNING YOUR COMPUTER IS SENDING OUT SPAMcurity. It privaUNREGISTERED VERSION $35.59 TO REGISTERtely and seWARNING VISITING THIS SITE MAY HARM YOUR COMPUTERcurely lets any old pTHE FILE SLASHDOT.ORG IS INFECTED WITH A VIRUSrogram install itself on your comXP TOTALLY-REAL-ANTIVIRUS 2011 HAS FOUND PROBLEMSputer, as an admin, no matter what security settREGISTRY CLEANING IN PROGRESS, YO MOMMAings or domain policies you have installed. Chrome doeGIVEUSYOURCREDITCARD.RU.EXE SAYS YOU OWE US MONEY, KEKEKEsn't! In fact, the Pwn2Own guys couldn't even hack Chrome! How disgraceful!
Dude, if it's in an "Options" dialog we already know that 90% of users will not bother to touch it.
Also, while the first options tab controls *who* you send every single keystroke to, it isn't until you go to the "Under the Hood" tab that you can actually turn the feature off. So don't give me this "but but it isn't an advanced setting" crap just because the tab isn't named "Advanced".
>> Microsoft Claims Google Chrome Steals Your Privacy ... ... ... From Microsoft; who firmly believe they rightly own it.
-
Google steals your privacy and the health care bill kills old people.
how many users you think are going to check those just to know their privacy isn't violated?
All of them that are that anal about their privacy will.
Most of us, frankly, don't care if Google knows what addresses we've been putting into the address bar. It's not that big a deal. I could see terrorists or industrial spies not wanting to use chrome, but really, for most people this is not the kind of "privacy issue" that has them concerned. I use Google exclusively for my searches, so what difference is the address bar going to make? Get a grip, I and most others already trust them with far greater than the address bar, it is a non-issue.
Now, if you want to argue that Google should not be trusted, I'm all ears. So far they've done right by me and everybody else though, so you'd better have something pretty damning to make me change my mind.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
They (M$) do collect this information locally if you have form auto-completion
Yes, and my MS Outlook 2007 collects my emails and stores them locally too! Bastards!
All this means that the computer the guy was working on had a key logger Trojan installed.
Now if the guy is working in the department that creates code for office or the Win7 that would be a worry ;-)
to code or not to code, that is the question.
If you want to use Chrome without Google spying on you then use SRWare Iron instead. This page details the major differences between the two Chromium sourced browsers: http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php Download SRWare Iron here: http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_download.php
All of these settings are hidden in the advanced settings dialog
They aren't hidden, they're quite visible. 3 clicks show you them.
I seem to recall it is 4 clicks to disable UAC in Windows, but remember how much of a stink that put up when it came out? It's all about the DEFAULT behaviour of a program that determines the software company's evil or not evil motives.
So then what is a good browser? I do value privacy so I don't use Chrome (I figure google can have either my search history or web browsing history but not both, and adblock for Chrome really sucks). I hate ads so I don't use Opera (the adblock solution also sucks). I don't care about bloat, but I do care about speed, and firefox is the slowest of the main browsers I use (I do not use IE8). The four things I care about are security, ad-blocking, speed, and privacy. It looks like this is another case of "choose 3 out of 4".
It smells like sandalwood up here!
Well, Firefox's default behavior is to serve up your keystrokes to google as well, so I think the main point is that all three browsers' defaults aren't privacy friendly.
I am sorry, I can't put this any more politely. You just might be an idiot.
Chrome Options pane
It doesn't get any easier than that. Stop implying that Chrome's advanced page is akin to the other browsers.
The percentage of Chrome users who will adjust the settings is much higher than the percentage of non-Chrome users. Most of the people who accept the defaults won't bother to install an alternative browser.
Still doesn't have the level of cookie control that I an using with Firefox. Get prompted for all cookies, session only, easy to add permissions with out manually typing URLs. I also did a search on google add-ons for cookie tools. There were none. Still a fail for me.
However, I did install it for my mother in law. No idea if she will use it though. Should be better for her since she is running on old hardware and she doesn't care about privacy.
"He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
I've never tried Google Chrome, but now I never will unless they take this "feature" out.
They've already given you the option to disable it, good night.
Don't you do your searches with Google? You can't tell me you use Bing... This is trivial compared to your search history.
You also trust your ISP with everything you do on the net, I don't see you disconnecting your internet for that "invasion" of your privacy.
Seriously, you people need to get a grip. There isn't one person in ten thousand who's address bar history is so important that they'd actually care to dig it up and link it to you directly. You just aren't that important. The only reason Google uses it at all is to target unobtrusive advertisements at you - which makes ads less annoying and more relevant to you anyway.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
Yeah, lots of engineers want to make the world a better place in some way.
They are paid by people with money in order to make them more of it. The "bonus" for the workers is that they keep their jobs.
Could they have picked a more stereotypical "Revenge of the Nerds" character to read the autocue? hehe I felt like cream-pieing him in the first 10 seconds.
...any claim about protecting privacy from the one company that has been the direct or indirect cause of so much private data being lost or compromised is really rich. I'd have to think that it's a red herring, really, to divert attention away from the privacy/security problems IE 6/7/8, Windows XP/Vista/7 have already....
People might not go into the "Options" screen, but anyone doing something they want private has a fair chance of using the "incognito" feature which has all of that type of stuff disabled.
Personally, I think the URL suggestion thing is helpful and will continue to use it.
Assuming you didn't just pull that "90%" figure out of your ass, who cares? They obviously don't, and it's not my privacy they're dicking with. Besides, it's not like Google and every other search engine out there doesn't already store and analyze search queries (indexed by IP address). Is it that big a problem that Google or Bing or whatever knows what you are about to search for before you hit the enter key?
How is Microsoft's response here not them trying desperately to spin their way past the latest Pwn2Own results from CanSecWest? Safari, Firefox and IE8 all went down pretty quickly. Chrome wasn't even attempted. Nobody there had a way to take it down. Money was left on the table.
( http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2010/02/15/pwn2own-2010 )
Microsoft's response?
First claim that Windows 7 isn't really meant to prevent you from hacking into it.
( http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9174309/Microsoft_defends_Windows_7_security_after_Pwn2Own_hacks )
Then try to convince people Chrome is somehow worse.
Seem's like that makes your choice to either accept that a company like Google knows what information you're looking for [turn off the option, heck even use a different browser. I'm sure they can figure it out anyway.] or letting random anyhacker access ALL the data on your system.
I'll take option A thanks.
They've already given you the option to disable it, good night.
So what? It should be disabled by default and you have to turn it on. If I hadn't read this article would I have even known they were doing this?
Don't you do your searches with Google?
It's quite obvious you're sending information to Google when you do a search.
You also trust your ISP with everything you do on the net
I've never actually heard of an ISP that does the deep packet inspection necessary to do this kind of spying. Anyway, the point here is Google is actually sending and very likely recording your information. If you'd like to point our ISPs that do deep packet inspection and keep track of what website I visit, I'll gladly not use them either.
Seriously, you people need to get a grip. There isn't one person in ten thousand who's address bar history is so important that they'd actually care to dig it up and link it to you directly. You just aren't that important.
Important to who? You seem to think people are only important as individuals. How much do you think an insurance company would pay to find out what foods you eat? How much do you think employers would pay for a list of what internet sites you frequent? You need to stop being so naive. Do you really learn nothing from history?
AccountKiller
Microsoft is starting to make sense.
I've never tried Google Chrome, but now I never will unless they take this "feature" out. I won't use IE either of course. Microsoft may have more respect for my privacy, but they don't have any respect for my security.
Of course Microsoft doesn't have any more respect for your privacy. This particular problem seems pretty much an inadvertent consequence of the (otherwise very nice) combining of the address and search boxes in chrome; the fact that IE doesn't do the same thing is only due to its clunkier interface.
The fact that MS is trumpeting it this way smacks more of a desperate swat at a competitor than anything else...
We live, as we dream -- alone....
You and them.
Who cares? I think everyones missing the real reason Chrome fails and that's it's sole purpose is to entice people away from firefox and adblock+ I can control what I see in my browser, Google should know better than anyone that once this kind of Genie is out of it's bottle there's no putting it back in.
What a lame attempt, microsoft ...
1) - If you use explorer, you are using windows. The chances of someone exploiting your browser and getting access to all your files is 90%
- You can use Chrome in Mac or GNU/Linux. Both Chrome and your OS keep your data secure
2) - I have the source code for Chrome (Chromium) and I can study it, make sure it's safe, or change whatever I want. Also, I know the community has reviewed it, and the company is not trying to hid anything behind a binary
- I don't have the source of explorer, and microsoft has a huge history of phoning home and spying on users
3 - Chrome is standards compliant, so there's no vendor tie-in. If I find something I don't like, I can move on to another browser
- Explorer is platform specific, and non compliant with standards. That means, if I develop anything for it, it'll probably be incompatible with other browsers and moving away will be hard.
Sorry microsoft, Google published the source code for their browser, it's well developed, multi-platform, they'll take my patches and if they are good implement them on their source, and they are open and transparent about everything the browser does. They are doing all the right things, and I just love this browser.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Use SRWare's Iron.
It's google Chrome without the reporting bits (and actually with newer rendering java, so it's actually faster).
It's screamingly fast, and emulates IE-dedicated pages (including nasties like MS Webmail) far better than Firefox. I love it.
-Styopa
This is some rather lame marketing by Microsoft because Chrome's user experience with one magic box for address and search is so spot on and IE's dual boxes seems so lame and dated. Particularly in Windows, it is just as easy to get at keystroke messages for all windows as it is to get them in one, you can go in your main message loop:
while (GetMessage(msg)) {
if( msg.something == WM_KEYDOWN)
log(msg);
}
I think would work for just about everything.
So yes, Microsoft might have a point about Chrome invading your privacy, but, at the same time, trying to bundle it in with a critique of chrome's single window is just marketese and really undermines the rest of their own point. It's such a stretch of reality, that you have to wonder how much the rest of their message is true.
This is my sig.
That said, most of that 90% of users who wouldn't bother changing the default options in Chrome probably wouldn't have Chrome to begin with. Most of those users would be using whatever browser came pre-installed on the PC that they ordered from Dell or picked up at Sam's Club, and many of them probably haven't even heard of Chrome yet.
My point is that Chrome already has a pretty advanced user base (advanced enough to know how to download and install a web browser, anyway), and they would know how to edit privacy options if they wanted to do so.
Open this in Firefox and see what happens in the Task Manager:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world-news.aspx
If the browser doesn't hog a full processor straight away, then try opening a couple of news articles in tabs.
This is great. Microsoft may or may not have done a good job of providing valuable information to users of Chrome. Except users of Chrome can't view the video so what's the point? To convince someone using IE to not use Chrome. Do they hope that that using Chrome will switch to IE because they can't view the video? No, those users will simply disregard the video as typical Microsoft propaganda attempting to scare users into using Microsoft products. What a waste and proof of how stupid and arrogant large corporations have become.
Microsoft just wishes that they had thought of it first.
No, it isn't, unless you're typing in the search bar and not the location bar.
But those same 90% have already given out all their details to facebook, so who cares if the browser also collects information on them. It's not like they have that much less privacy with a browser that knows what URLs they went to.
And besides, I really think 90% is a huge leap. As with Android, Geeks use Chrome, regular people use IE.
Another thing, if we are going to keep talking FUD, your ISP knows who you are and can parse/sniff/store all the HTTP traffic you send, and even for encrypted traffic they know where it is going. Google is not that big of a worry.
No it isn't, except when it is. You do raise a valid point, but I meant the search bar. Sure, we can say that Chrome is worse for pulling in URLs as collateral damage, but my point is that all three browsers are sending keystroke, and I don't like this either. It's not that much worse than uploading search terms each time a search is made, but at least I have to hit enter before the terms are uploaded.
The fact is, Chrome is the most privacy intrusive browser
Firefox's Awesome Bar does the exact same thing, by default. IE's anti-phishing sends every URL you visit to Microsoft.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
There are ad blocking extensions for Chrome, for what it's worth. Not sure about Java Script control though..
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
What's so hard to understand about this problem? Most users want to use suggestions only for their searches, not URLs they enter.
Bullshit. Most users only use the search bars on Firefox and IE, anyway. And they frequently type URLs into them. If I had a nickel for every time I saw someone type "google" into the search bar, click the first result from MSN and then type a search...
Usage studies is how Google came to their cleaner interface. Your concerns about privacy are valid, and I wouldn't doubt that factored into their design decisions, but I wouldn't be surprised if the other browsers combined their bars eventually, too. We're already moving that way with FX's awesome-bar.
How is this news? All of the information is clearly spelled out in black and white at: http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/privacy.html
Because opening control panel and typing "UAC" in the search field is really hard.
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
Ironic then that there is also an adblock+(flashblock too) for google chrome.
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
most of the engineers might be sincere, but whoever's managing the project or heading the company might not be.
Did you not read TFA at all ? You can not only choose which search provider to use the search suggestions, you can also turn off search suggestions in chrome !!
All of these settings are hidden in the advanced settings dialog
Blast them for hiding the Settings in the Settings menu!
Plus, most of that 90% of users are not likely to care that much about their privacy. Those advanced users who do will easily be able to find the option.
also, i was surprised to find bing as an option in chrome.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
no, i don't want to make a choice between searching or entering a url. i want it done automatically. what chrome does is what the future of browsing will be like.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
This was discussed before:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/12/17/1436257/Google-Says-Ad-Blockers-Will-Save-Online-Ads
And it reminds me of one of my AskReddit submissions where I mentioned a Slashdot comment about ad-blocking that mentioned that "(I work at Google, hence posting as AC.)":
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/bk093/i_work_at_google_hence_posting_as_ac_really/
It's useless. some people refuse to realize that ads are not inherently bad. they are obnoxious/annoying only when they are irrelevant for you. google is trying to change that. by tracking your activities google can show you ads that are actually useful to you. i just can't see any problem with that. and google, unlikw m$, won't share your data with the government of china.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
As someone who "has his head so far up Google's ass" id like to present you with some encriminating information about ms. Due to spam i had changed my email several times while with hotmail (ms) and the last one i made before i switched to gmail. i hadn't done anything with the hotmail account. It was empty. No subscriptions made.... then as i come back from my calming conversion to Gmail weeks later. I SEE SPAM!!!!!! AT LEAST 5 DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH I DID NOT SUBSCRIBE ON THE FIRST PAGE OF MY INBOX!!!!!!!!! microsoft's main goal was always and has always been to make a profit. how else would all those glitches still be in the operating system. they are not trying to make it better they are trying to slow down the process so that they can have all the good stuff saved for when they have competitors. we all know that microsoft is holding out on us. either that or they have lost their game.
RIP TRICERATOPS, YOU NEVER EXISTED
As somebody who personally knows people working on Chrome, I can assure you that data mining was not the goal of Chrome. Most engineers at Google are sincerely trying to make the Web a better place. That this actually helps Google is just a bonus for them.
What, and the engineers working at Microsoft all cackle evilly muttering about sharks and laser beams as they plot to take over the software industry? The people working on a product are essentially never the ones with ill intent.
The intent of the people working on the project is quite irrelevant. What matters is the company itself, and what they can do with what they've developed. Everyone wants to believe that Google is some benevolent savior, but the realities of large business suggest otherwise. Let's say they are at this moment. How long do you think that attitude can last?
AccountKiller
I still prefer the way Opera does it, which is if I want to search I can type "g " or "y " to search google or yahoo. I use this all the time. This way if I want to search using the bar it is explicit. On the other hand most people wouldn't bother to figure out such a feature even exists...
I only use Chrome for surfing porn, because it helps to have all the cookies, etc, enabled and safe from IE exploits. Because I only use it for porn, I'm not worried about cookie crossover from porn sites to email/banking/slashdot/etc.
I use Firefox for all of my serious browsing - i.e. anything that isn't porn and requires a password - because I can use "Request Policy" and "NoScript."
For casual browsing, I use IE but I have everything disabled (no javascript, no active x, etc.)
I encourage others to do the same... let chrome be the default browser for all your porn and return to firefox (with all of those lovely addons to give real security) for your serious stuff.
You have some serious mental issues.
Are you really shocked that Windows has a default browser? Same as every other OS? And they all take you to some default web page? And it has a default behaviour? And most of all, are you shocked about the fact that its default action for a mistyped URL is taking you to their website?
Lets see. Chrome and Mozilla by default take you to Google. (Mozilla takes you to their google formatted page). How dare they!!??!! Next thing you'll tell me that when you mistype something in Chrome, it takes you to a google search engine?
What about QQ-the prominant IM software in China, which has 500 buddy limit for basic account? Today I fail to add buddy any more with a diagbox reads "Your buddy count reachs up-limit", while I did Excel, I have 471 guys,14 groups.So,I called CS,after 5min 56sec queuing,a girl answered,astonishing enough,she asked me for my account pswd "Is it ok we login your account to check the problem?"
Of course Microsoft doesn't have any more respect for your privacy.
Microsoft doesn't make it's money by selling or mining data, Google does. From a simple business standpoint Microsoft really had little to gain from giving users more privacy. Google of course does stand to lose more if they had stricter privacy policies and less data collection.
This particular problem seems pretty much an inadvertent consequence of the (otherwise very nice) combining of the address and search boxes in chrome;
You really think it was inadvertent? I think it's quite obvious that a search company wants to position its search technology in the most obvious place. People that WORK in a search company think search is the most important thing, and think of their service as being integral to the software. This was not just an "inadvertent consequence", it was a very obvious design decision. Many of these kinds of decisions are so ingrained in a culture that it doesn't even seem like a decision.
the fact that IE doesn't do the same thing is only due to its clunkier interface.
I doubt it, but we'll never know. Microsoft isn't that bad when it comes to privacy policies. The only notable thing I can recall about Microsoft and privacy was putting ethernet addresses in Word docs.
The fact that MS is trumpeting it this way smacks more of a desperate swat at a competitor than anything else...
Obviously. Microsoft doesn't care about promoting privacy of course.
AccountKiller
Um, Firefox's address bar searches your local bookmarks and history. The "suggestions" are from your own locally stored browsing habits, which you can burn to the ground with every exit if you like.
--
Toro
We've been promised that for a while, typing in a term being equal to the site you want to go to.
I start typing "news for nerds" and I end up with an item for Slashdot right there.
Now it's close to being here thanks to technology like this.
Maybe it's time I finally try Chrome... It must be good, when Microsoft starts making PR against it...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Most users want to use suggestions only for their searches, not URLs they enter.
Since huge numbers of average people use Google to search for facebook.com, then click on the link in the search results, I'm going to say that you're wrong about "most people." In fact, I bet they love suggestions for URLs.
Put identity in the browser.
Ahem ... it uses Google Safe Browsing Tool. O_o
Put identity in the browser.
And 90% of all statistics are made up on the spot!
You can delete all cookies or history on exit automatically in Chrome, too. Firefox's anti-phishing, though, sends information to "Mozilla's partners" (a.k.a. Google). I don't really see the difference.
Put identity in the browser.
Google, gives me search results tailored to my experience. Without learning from my search habits there is no way they can do that. I don't need to use their engine, but I do. Part of that reason is because it does remember my search patterns and tailors my results to them.
once more into the breach
You're mistaken. I don't want that shit for searches either. I even set a proxy rule to ensure the Google browser cookie for it is set to off so I don't have to worry about it should I clear my cookies.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The issue with Google, and the reason why people shove their heads so far up their asses, is that Google hasn't done anything bad with the info they are collecting. They have had gaffs like Buzz default settings, but the fact that Google knows what adverts to toss your way really isn't all that disconcerting. So I get an ad I might click on instead of OMFG HOME LOANS 4 FREE!!!11!! ads really doesn't cause much lost sleep.
The big reason why everyone has their lips firmly planted on Google's ass is because Google's business model is to increase connectivity. That is good for Google, but also good for me. Google plowing into the smart phone market with an alternative to the closed loop Apple products is a good thing. Google tossing Chrome into the wind to show how to REALLY do a browser is a good thing. If Google pulls the trigger on offering ultra high bandwidth broadband at rates to make the cable companies weep, that is a freaking awesome thing. Does it all serve Google's bottom line? Sure. It also serves my happiness.
All that is wrong with Google is its potential do something horrible. If Google wanted to do something truly evil, they could. They have a scary amount of information and power they are sitting on, but it is just a potential they have thus far refrained from trying to use.
I'm wondering how much I'd (and you'd) be willing to pay for more privacy. It shouldn't be too hard to modify a browser to go through some kind of anonymizing proxy, to change IP adress, user-agent footprint, control cookies... But that service does have a running cost. Opera for example already has a 'turbo' mode that uses their servers as proxies to speed things up on low-bandwidth links (image compression...).
As a side benefit, that service could include at least basic malware/scam protection (on the fly antivirus, server/IP blacklists...)
To me, at $1/month it would be a no-brainer. but at $10/month it would be too expensive.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
He wont get a job at Google, when he tries to apply there few years down.
Senthil
I am with MSFT on this one -- Google's stand on privacy have always been questionable at best because Mountain View jockeys need your personal data to make money. Google may release an OS, a browser and a phone but most of the company's revenue is generated by ads. And quality ads require data about users: Your queries, e-mails, locations, etc. can be used for targeted advertising.
Also, let's not forget the privacy terms. For every query log Google keeps a cookie and an IP address along with the query. The cookie will become anonymous within 9 months. The last octet of the IP will be removed while leaving the first three in place. MSFT removes the full IP from the logs after several months. Google has stated that you can remove the cookie yourself but how many non-geeks know how to do it?
As does Mozilla and SeaMonkey. One field for address bar and search is more convenient than having to click in another area to perform search. This just is a design choice and doesn't affect privacy in any way. Except if your direct url requests are sent to Goggle. I never used Chrome so I don't know know but I don't think it's the case. 90% of Microsoft announcements are meaningless at best and spread false information at worse. They don't care as long as we talk about their products. That's free advertising. Result: everybody heard at least once about "Microsoft".
On top of the fact that Hotmail must have some deal where a spammer pays enough money, and no amount of marking as spam will keep their mail out of your inbox. I gave The Ladders my "oh, you need an email address, do you?" Hotmail address. Saw what a scam that was, and started marking their mail as spam. Months went by, kept marking, and their stuff still made its way into my inbox. I'd blow it off as a broken feature if it didn't work for other domains.
I guess The Ladders didn't pay their bill, as I notice in the past week that their stuff in the Junk folder now.
with a mind of their own is that you can actually choose yourself what browser to use (this is a revolutionary idea, i know) without any lawmaker having to tell you which one you can not use. I prefer chrome cos its light and fast and very handy whereas ie8 is a resource gobbler. When it comes to morals and privacy i think microsoft is probably the last one who should start a flamewar with anyone ...
beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
Then why the fuck is something, that in-your-face obviously nobody wants, since it is a crooked criminal privacy invasion, ON BY DEFAULT?
Are you really trying to tell me, that this is not completely intentional? That it is not the point of the whole browser?
Because then you are seriously delusional!
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Dude, if it's in an "Options" dialog we already know that 90% of users will not bother to touch it.
But maybe they read the news? It's been mentioned, it caused a stir, it was evil. But maybe these mysterious users neither read news or look at options despite caring about their privacy a lot. Or maybe they don't care about their privacy much, which turns this into a non-issue for them. <--- MOST LIKELY REASON
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
It's all about the DEFAULT behaviour of a program that determines the software company's evil or not evil motives.
If convenient options are turned off by default, Google Chrome instead becomes annoying in the press.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Meh, so let's turn to the savior of the web - Firefox. The browser we Slashdotters can cum on and feel good about. Who do they cooperate with by sending everything you type into the address bar, every search you visit, to check where you go? OH FUCK, GOOGLE! But maybe this is more acceptable, after all it's about the phishing site filter this time, it's about security. Then they can gladly let Google track your browser habits, which they of course do behind the scenes of their phishing filter, logging all queries there, because they're evil.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Actually this is what I did with ff. I search with the normal URL bar.
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
Wait, let me try that:
I invite you to my home. For free! I will pay girls that will fulfill your every wish! Come here or hate yourself for the rest of your life! *
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
* Official terms and conditions as stated on my site, apply.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
P.S.: I fear that without pointing out the second gray item on the terms page, the point I’m trying to make, would be lost.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Well, in the EU, MS offers you a nice 'browser choice' window, which lets you choose an alternative browser. That's sure to make quite a few less techie people install Chrome (and other browsers too of course). But didn't google's browser ask you whether you wanted to enable some of those features upon using it for the first time?
How amusing. I clicked through to watch Microsoft's video on how bad Google are.
But the video requires silverlight.
I'll just have to carry on in ignorance...
VLC Remote for iPhone and Android
P.P.S.: Oh great. I linked to my staging server, which you can never reach. Try this one instead: http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/tnc.html
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Not in the address bar. Which is why i disabled the useless space-taking separate search field, and am using this layout: http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/my-firefox.png (No, I don’t have to black out anything. I made sure to kill the session and you can get the e-mail anyway. ^^)
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
The real issue with Chrome is all the malware that comes with it - GoogleUpdate and the THREE scheduled tasks it secretly installs to replicate itself. Being eviller by the day it seems.
To be fair, the first thing Chrome asks you after being installed is whether you want to keep Google as the search engine in the address bar or change it.
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
It used to give you the option between live URL checking and a downloaded list, but now the option is missing and a quick look in about:config suggests they're indeed checking each URL now.
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
I still prefer the way Opera does it, which is if I want to search I can type "g " or "y " to search google or yahoo. I use this all the time. This way if I want to search using the bar it is explicit.
Firefox also does it this way & has done for a while.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
There is a big difference. IE8 checks URLs against Microsoft's phishing database as you visit them, telling Microsoft which sites you visit in the process.
Firefox periodically downloads a file of known phishing sites and searches it locally.
Source
Because unlike the other evil giants, someone still has to prove that Google actually is evil.
I personally only ever type 2 urls. My internet banking site(6 symbols) and google. That's one awesome dataset...
Fine. Microsoft is bashing Goggle again. Har. Har. Oh they have a point? ooooooh.
Dammit, Firefox has done this for years. The god damn Google HOME PAGE is like this. Look at the damn script. Hell, just look on how it "suggests" stuff. Its not comming from your hard drive:P
I bet if you dig in the scripts on MSN you will find the same kind of "feature'
This gets me worked up. The only people who care about privacy is ONLY people who care about privacy. This article is only posted to piss off the slashdoters.
Sadly, it works on to many fronts.
Agreed. My wife does this all the time, despite me pointing out the site she's after is cached in URL bar because she goes there every day. So for her a combined URL and search bar is a blessing. In fact, I've even got used to it myself and discovered I really like it. Chrome over all is just a better browser than IE, Firefox or Safari, IMO. And having made the switch I have no intention of switching back.
Chrome also does it, but if you don't use any prefix keyword or whatever they are called it uses Google by default.
Mada mada dane.
How is this different than using Google search inside Internet Explorer?
No sig today...
Dude, if it's in an "Options" dialog we already know that 90% of users will not bother to touch it.
just to add something...when you install google chrome for the first time it actually asks to choose search provider right on the first tab with a big and obvious popup. So those 90% users are at least forced to choose who to send the data to.
Then why do people bitch when IE does the same? In every discussion people say that MS has specifically made it "hard" for people to change their search provider because it's in the options, just the same way that Chrome has it.
IE8 does the same actually.
Somehow Microsoft always come across as socially awkward dorks, especially by lashing out so randomly.
Emphasis mine.
Source here
So does offline GMail... M$ 1 - 1 Google
While I am wary of Chrome, there's a very simple reason this warning is coming from Microsoft.
This post brought to you by Captain Obvious
Isn't that like the giant black hole calling the kettle black, please.....
M$ should tidy their backyard first, before talking about anyone else being doing evil...
especially against someone like google who has been all about doing no evil....and has proven an excellent track record.
"Awesome bar". It's a plugin that integrates the search box into your address bar. I'm running it, because I like the convenience.
What a depressingly stupid machine.
Exactly ... and as for suggestions ... they may be sending requests with keystrokes, but I would imagine they are not 'storing' them along with their order and identifiable data (They could be, but I doubt it). I would think that would be too unreliable and risky in terms of performance. Firefox does essentially the same thing via it's search box when Google and/or Yahoo are selected.
I bet they do store *queries*. A Request does not automatically equate to storing something in a database. Do MSN/BING/Yahoo!/[INSERTSEARCHPROVIDER] not store the queries (along with environmental info. about those queries) and the subsequent clicks and look at that data?
And there's things like this from the article:
---
In the second part of the video, LePage demonstrates how Internet Explorer 8 has a privacy feature called InPrivate, a privacy mode to allow browsing without leaving a trace. Unfortunately, he fails to acknowledge the existence of Google Chrome's Incognito, which disables history tracking, which undercuts his argument.
---
And there's the question of how IE does it's Anti-phishing ... I'm sure it send all your URL's through M$'s network. Does he address whether or not those are stored? M$ is just mad that Google beat them to the idea ... Look for it in a future version of IE. Move along folks ... nothing new to see here.
Just check your browser's privacy options and set them to level you are comfortable using them.
Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas
[May God give you double that which you wish for me]
Ya know, the dividing line between when Big Bad changed from Big Blue to Microsoft was never clear, and was not evident until it was well over.
We could be in a similar situation now. Microsoft is certainly recognizing Google as a significant player, anyway.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
{"The FBI considers the cyber threat against our nation to be one of the greatest concerns of the 21st century," Steven Chabinksy, the deputy assistant director of the FBI's cyber division, told the same congressional committee.}
Nice link for a tin-hatted AC. Somehow, inadvertant to their primary function as Agents Of Repression, sometimes the FBI and NSA do manage to provide some useful protections for the average Citizen.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
Could you be so kind as to articulate WHY this makes Google evil? I doubt you've thought about at all and this is your knee-jerk reaction.
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
Citation?
What I found, the last time I looked, is that it keeps a local whitelist, and sends URLs not on that whitelist to the server-side blacklist.
There are legitimate reasons for keeping the blacklist server-side, but it does have pretty much the same privacy issues.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
MS is going to out do Chrome by adding precise controls to allow users to decide which malware IE runs. When will Chrome offer the user such freedom and control?
I could have sworn it was 89.3472%
Unless you change your default to one of the other providers.