Slashdot Mirror
Security Expert Slams Google+ Pseudonym Policy
An anonymous reader writes "A security expert has panned Google's "real name" policy on Google+, claiming that the hard line will damage privacy. Sophos's Chester Wisniewski says that closing accounts where users have adopted false names erodes privacy on the social network. 'What they seemed to have missed is that the very foundation of privacy is identity. Simply knowing my postal code or birth date is meaningless without a name to associate it with. By requiring people to only use their real names, unless they just happen to be a celebrity, they have eliminated the ability for people to be private in any meaningful way.'"
I'm pretty sure that's Google's exact intention. If you force people to use their real name, tracking them over all the web gets much easier.
If large amounts of people abandon Facebook for G+ they will be motivated by having more control over their privacy. Taking that motivation away, before G+ is even out of beta is a fairly stupid thing for Google to do.
Given what happened with Buzz I'm starting to think that Google has some decision makers who are either very stupid or very out of touch with how people think. I suggest leaving the office and geek circles to get to know some regular people.
I'm glad I created my G+ account with a faux name that sounds like a real name if this is the way they are going to be.
I have still yet to see them use the real name policy on anyone in my circles. Who checks the names? Do they need to be reported? I'm looking at one of my circles right now, and I see names like Sordid Euphemism, Mr Dragon, reddit brony, Fluttershy, the autowitch, Rainbow Danish, etc. Not to mention my own obviously fake name. As far as I can tell this policy isn't being strictly enforced, if at all. That doesn't change the fact that it is a stupid policy, but they don't seem to be removing fake accounts left and right.
And requiring "real" names changes that in what way exactly? The average troll/spammer does not even expect his account to live any meaningful length of time. Besides, who says that I'm not really "Frank Benson" or "Thomas Senner"? I mean, until I trolled and spammed like there's no tomorrow, i.e. when this account gets closed and "Norman Richardson" registers?
(disclaimer: None of those names are mine, neither do I know anyone by that name. I made them up. Any similarities with existing people is purely coincidental and not intended)
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
While I agree with you, I might want to point out that if people do not complain about things they do not like, these things will not change. No, we're not entitled to forcing a provider to give us whatever we want, but if people voice their opinion, maybe someone will notice that there's a market for it and will start a service.
Free market works both ways. Sometimes, the suppliers just need to be shown what is wanted.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.