Slashdot Mirror
Google Bought Mastercard Data To Link Online Ads To Store Purchases, Says Report (bloomberg.com)
According to Bloomberg, citing people with knowledge of the deal, Google purchased "a stockpile of Mastercard transactions" that allowed Google advertisers to see whether the ads they ran online led to a sale at a physical store in the U.S. This arrangement was never shared with the public. From the report: Alphabet's Google and Mastercard brokered a business partnership during about four years of negotiations. The alliance gave Google an unprecedented asset for measuring retail spending, part of the search giant's strategy to fortify its primary business against onslaughts from Amazon and others. But the deal, which has not been previously reported, could raise broader privacy concerns about how much consumer data technology companies like Google quietly absorb.
Google paid Mastercard millions of dollars for the data [...] and the companies discussed sharing a portion of the ad revenue. A spokeswoman for Google said there is no revenue sharing agreement with its partners. A Google spokeswoman declined to comment on the partnership with Mastercard, but addressed the ads tool. "Before we launched this beta product last year, we built a new, double-blind encryption technology that prevents both Google and our partners from viewing our respective users' personally identifiable information," the company said in a statement. "We do not have access to any personal information from our partners' credit and debit cards, nor do we share any personal information with our partners." The company said people can opt out of ad tracking using Google's "Web and App Activity" online console. Inside Google, multiple people raised objections that the service did not have a more obvious way for cardholders to opt out of the tracking.
Google paid Mastercard millions of dollars for the data [...] and the companies discussed sharing a portion of the ad revenue. A spokeswoman for Google said there is no revenue sharing agreement with its partners. A Google spokeswoman declined to comment on the partnership with Mastercard, but addressed the ads tool. "Before we launched this beta product last year, we built a new, double-blind encryption technology that prevents both Google and our partners from viewing our respective users' personally identifiable information," the company said in a statement. "We do not have access to any personal information from our partners' credit and debit cards, nor do we share any personal information with our partners." The company said people can opt out of ad tracking using Google's "Web and App Activity" online console. Inside Google, multiple people raised objections that the service did not have a more obvious way for cardholders to opt out of the tracking.
I use Visa only. Thankfully, I can rest easy knowing that'd never happen with anything but Mastercard. /s
Is the story here that *MASTERCARD* sells all your financial transaction data around the world to lots of companies (think Cambridge Analytics etc.), or that Google buys them?
It seems to be a Mastercard story dressed up as a Google one.
Financial transactions should be covered by the same level of privacy as banking transactions, which would make this illegal to sell that data in EU, and it use to be USA had similar laws.
But given that they're selling the data, can we buy Trump/Trump family/Trump company/ card data? If he has nothing to hide, and I'm sure that's true because he keeps saying it on twitter, then he has nothing to fear.
Seriously, it is long past time to fire him.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
It should always be assumed that Google is spying on anything they can, that they will lie about it when feasible, and that they have no shame in doing so. This is not new. It's up to you to protect yourself.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
This isn't some new behavior for Google - just an expansion of an already existing program. Google has been collecting your off-line purchases for years now. They're
boasting about it, too.
Here's a relevant quote: ...even if your business doesn't have a large loyalty program, you can still measure store sales by taking advantage of Google's third-party partnerships, which capture approximately 70% of credit and debit card transactions in the United States. So, more than two thirds of your non on-line purchases are tracked by Google and sold to all and sundry.
Of course, as a simple citizen, you get no option or recourse. Even if you haven't ever signed on with Google, even if aren't using any of their properties, or if you tried to opt out of everything, you' still can't escape their stalking. Every breath you take, every move you make, they'll be watching you.
I work for a company that links up similar data. Y'all have no idea.
Google is waging war on our psyche. This here is intelligence gathering, to better identify weak spots in our defenses, in preparation for an escalation of their assault.
Will we ever fight back?
we built a new, double-blind encryption technology that prevents both Google and our partners from viewing our respective users' personally identifiable information
For those who are wondering, here's how it works:
I'm a google rewards user (never paid for anything on google play - except w/ my soul), and I've been suspecting this for a while and here's why... 90% of the time after I visit any store or restaurant i get a survey request where it asks me which store i visited, nails it 99% of the time on which store i visited, and then asks me what i payment type i used to make the purchase: credit card, cash, etc... At first the surveys would ask if i would share my receipt. figuring they could then tie my purchases to my google account, I've declined to share the receipts every time they ask, and i will continue to... However recently (in the past 3 months or so) they quit asking me for a receipt. which meant either: a) they knew who i was already by my CC# or b) they were smart enough to know that i wouldn't share that info so they quit asking for it. w/e idc.., i get "free" shit on google play for putting up with better targeted ads.
Bonus points if you can name the film in which the preceding words were uttered.
Porklips Now.
Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.
get a SWAT team storming into your living room.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/01/new-york-police-terrorism-pressure-cooker
They are customers to each other. Then add in a nations security services AC. Very different from the role of the consumers.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Especially so in Europe where the GDPR clearly forbids opt-out.
My gf looked at a dress on my computer. She LOOKED at it.
Now I get adverts almost everywhere, and they're trying to sell me... you guessed it... a dress.
I tend to rant.
TFA says "It had two components. The first lets companies with personal information on consumers, like encrypted email addresses, upload those into Google’s system and synchronize ad buys with offline sales. The second injects card data.
It works like this: a person searches for 'red lipstick' on Google, clicks on an ad, surfs the web but doesn’t buy anything. Later, she walks into a store and buys red lipstick with her Mastercard. The advertiser who ran the ad is fed a report from Google, listing the sale along with other transactions in a column that reads 'Offline Revenue'..."
This tells us that Googod must know the identity of the hapless consumer and the specific product purchased. Or that I've wine too much drunk this evening...
Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.
that ads lead to sales. Now they are saying that they do not know this to be true?
nice
Wasn't there an outcry, not long ago, over iOS location services still recording your location even when disabled? Also, is this the story you read? Seems Apple is doing the same thing; at least according to that source. If you think there's a whole lot of difference between a ping ever 15 minutes and a ping every 1.5 minutes (or 18 and 90), when the location granularity is something like 30-80ft (actually look at GPS accuracy numbers in real world use sometime, you rarely see better than that) you're mistaken.
Also, you must be completely blind to Apple's underhanded practices. The stories abound, so you have to be actively trying to avoid them.
If you think you would like Android, try it. It's no worse than iOS and Google is no worse than Apple.
Apply some critical thinking: Apple didn't become the richest company in the world on the backs of the smallest market share in the industry by being open and honest.
Sent from my 2016 MacBook Pro. No, really, I'm not an Apple hater, just a realist.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
"Don't be quite as evil as some others. Maybe. Maybe not quite as evil as pimps. That's it."
Block all ads, all the time, no exceptions. If you have an ad-supported business that runs ethically, too fucking bad. The 99% of other ads ruined it for you.
What, no apologists whining (in the Jim Sterling triple-hey voice) "but that stealing"?
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Of course, as a simple citizen, you get no option or recourse.
This has nothing to do with being a citizen but 100% with being a consumer. Stop mixing unmixable things.
Catalin Braescu
Ofaly.com
Wasn't there an outcry, not long ago, over iOS location services still recording your location even when disabled?
No, not recently. There was a big bug 7 years ago that led to that, and it was fixed by Apple in the next point release. I think that was iOS 4.0 (we're currently about to get 12).
Also, you must be completely blind to Apple's underhanded practices. The stories abound, so you have to be actively trying to avoid them.
No company is perfect, but Apple is light years better than Google in personal privacy and security. Probably because Apple makes money by selling you secure personal devices, and makes more money the more secure and personal they are. Google gives that part away, and makes more money the better they can track you and sell your information.
If you think you would like Android, try it. It's no worse than iOS and Google is no worse than Apple.
Sure, just be aware of what the people selling you your product do to profit, and expect to be treated accordingly.
Apply some critical thinking: Apple didn't become the richest company in the world on the backs of the smallest market share in the industry by being open and honest.
Apple is perhaps one of the least "open" company in the world, but one of the most honest. The transaction is really simple. Here's the best mobile device in the world, give us money. Here's the best wireless headphones in the world, give us money. Here's the best tablet in the world, give us money. Here's a service that integrates it all, give us money. Their success isn't some secret cabal.
E pluribus unum
You have created a sad, fearful reality for yourself to live in.
E pluribus unum
Here's the best mobile device in the world, give us money. Here's the best wireless headphones in the world, give us money. Here's the best tablet in the world, give us money. Here's a service that integrates it all, give us money.
Only one of those is true. Nobody has the iPad beat, simply because Android only makes a halfassed attempt at being a tablet OS. The market agrees and it outsells every other tablet combined.
Best mobile device is entirely subjective and will be based on needs. For well more than half the market, it's clearly not good enough so, clearly, not the best.
As for the wireless headphones, well... that's entirely objective. They're easy to lose, which makes them not the best if you want to keep them; but, ignoring that, they measurably don't have the best audio reproduction. Period.
And if Apple has told you otherwise, they were not being honest.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I am shocked but not surprise that Google and Mastercard got together to exchange very private, very personal information. These are two giant companies that decided that your private information was open to being bought and sold. No hacking company server and selling it on the dark web. No back alley meetings where a briefcase of cash is exchanged for a thumb drive of data. Just big corporations sinking to a new ethical low.
What is next, Google is going to ask BofA for my bank statements to see how much money is in my checking account so that they can display wealth appropriate ads to me?
Disclosure: I work in infosec and we treat PCI data (credit card data) like it is national security secrets. It is against everything we believe to think that anyone but the minimal number of parties have access to your data.
All the people here on slashdot that said credit card companies do not sell their transaction data, well here is the proof you were demanding. I will say it again here is one of the many reasons cryptocurrency was invented and why so many people want it to replace banks and credit card companies. Just saying.
That has not been my experience. Maybe that's because I don't buy the $50 "last year's model" special. You can still buy the S8 new today, and it's certainly more than a year old -- and supported, still getting updated. A friend of mine with an S7 still receives updates monthly.
And I know when both of these phones came out, because I bought both of them on day one. Not because I had to, but because a priomary feature of my phones is the camera and the camera on the S8 was that much better than the S7; repeat with the S9. Plus models, of course; I like 'em a little on the big side.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.