Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Demanded T-Mobile, Sprint To Not Sell Google Fi Customers' Location Data (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: On Thursday, AT&T announced it was stopping the sale of its customers' real-time location data to all third parties, in response to a Motherboard investigation showing how data from AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint trickled down through a complex network of companies until eventually landing the hands of bounty hunters and people unauthorized to handle it. To verify the existence of this trade, Motherboard paid $300 on the black market to successfully locate a phone.

Google, whose Google Fi program offers phone, text, and data services that use T-Mobile and Sprint network infrastructure in the United States, told Motherboard that it asked those companies to not share its customers' location data with third parties. "We have never sold Fi subscribers' location information," a Google spokesperson told Motherboard in a statement late on Thursday. "Google Fi is an MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) and not a carrier, but as soon as we heard about this practice, we required our network partners to shut it down as soon as possible." Google did not say when it made this a requirement.

25 of 58 comments (clear)

  1. Demanded they stop until Google gets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Their cut of the proceeds.

    1. Re:Demanded they stop until Google gets by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Or until they can rebuild their reputation.

      Google is like Microsoft 20 years ago. It is popular, however its reputation is getting further tainted, mostly due to aggressive business decisions that negatively affect its customers.

      This bad reputation is strongly the reason why Apple had such growth the past decade+. As demand for mobile devices increased, we no longer could make x86 compatible devices that were mobile. So the huge MS Software library would be unavailable. So people switch to Apple Devices iPods, iPhone, realizing if they are going to get new software anyways, they might as well go with a company who at the time was known for its quality and reliability. Also for those who didn't like Apple, Google was the next best thing.

      Now Microsoft while still a huge company, is no longer the darling tech company, it is more like boring old IBM now, where they are now working hard to regain trust with customers again. While Google, and Apple running high on its success, started cutting corners that are pissing people off now.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Demanded they stop until Google gets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Google is like Microsoft 20 years ago.

      lol ok

      brought to you by someone who understands neither Microsoft 20 years ago or Google now

    3. Re:Demanded they stop until Google gets by fafalone · · Score: 2

      Microsoft [...], where they are now working hard to regain trust with customers again.

      LOL what!?!?!? They force installed an OS that is both adware and spyware with no way to permanently disable either of those behaviors, and they won't even sell the little people the version that lets you only get advertised to and spied on a little. Windows 10 is by a wide margin the greatest violation of trust they've EVER pulled, and good god is there heavy competition.

  2. "Black market" implies it is illegal by bigpat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unfortunately it probably isn't illegal for companies to sell customer data like this... but it should be illegal to sell intimate customer data without explicit consent and ongoing updates about specifically which companies are being given access to the data and in turn which other companies are getting access to the data further down the line.

    Maybe I would be ok with specific reputable ad companies using this data for specific advertising services, but not so ok if anyone can pay $300 and track my location.

    1. Re:"Black market" implies it is illegal by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      "The Data" is not 'your data', it's not 'customer data', it's 'their data'. At least, this is how it is in America, and has been since they first started collecting the data in 2001 (or before).

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    2. Re:"Black market" implies it is illegal by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately it probably isn't illegal for companies to sell customer data like this... but it should be illegal to sell intimate customer data without explicit consent

      It wouldn't make a difference......a very small percentage of the population even reads their cell phone contract, and most people don't care if their location data has been sold.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re: "Black market" implies it is illegal by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      Irregardless is a word sometimes used in place of regardless or irrespective, which has caused controversy since the early twentieth century, though the word appeared in print as early as 1795. Most dictionaries list it as non-standard or incorrect usage, and recommend that "regardless" should be used instead.

      Irregardless is a nonstandard synonym for regardless. Its nonstandard status is due to the double negative construction of the prefix ir- with the suffix -less.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  3. Business by Kohath · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because if that data is available from carriers, Google won't be able to monetize it exclusively themselves. They don't want any competition.

    1. Re:Business by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Because if that data is available from carriers, Google won't be able to monetize it exclusively themselves. They don't want any competition.

      There is some truth to that, but so what? In this case Google preventing competition means preventing a free (gray) market in buying and selling your personal data.

      Society needs better privacy laws which mandate disclosure down to specific transactions and amounts when personal data about customers is shared with third parties without specific authorization or at least specific disclosure so people have a chance to end their business relationship with that company.

      Sure, that would give Google a competitive advantage since they don't sell your personal data to third parties... they are just so big and collect so much and have a business model that can monetize that personal data without selling it to third parties. But I would be more than happy to give Google a competitive advantage if it meant putting an end to this gray marketplace of personal data.

      Although I wonder if they do in-fact buy personal data from third parties?... that is a more interesting question to me and one which would mean they are really feeding the beast.

  4. If it isn't illegal it should be by sjbe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe I would be ok with specific reputable ad companies using this data for specific advertising services, but not so ok if anyone can pay $300 and track my location.

    Why should ad companies get special privileges? I'm not ok with them using this data without my consent and frankly I think the term "reputable ad company" is something of an oxymoron. I certainly do not trust ANY of them including Google and especially Facebook. At minimum there should be a firewall so that third parties have no means of learning specific details about the individual being tracked without explicit consent from that individual. It should absolutely be illegal to sell identifiable tracking data to third parties without explicit written (and revocable) consent.

    1. Re:If it isn't illegal it should be by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Also... "maybe I would be okay with" clearly means I would be giving consent. I have a right to give my data to whomever I damn well please.

  5. Isn't it a bit early for April Fools Day? by TuballoyThunder · · Score: 5, Interesting
    At first I thought I accidentally went to The Onion when I saw the headline, but it really is Slashdot.

    As other have pointed out, I guess Google doesn't like the competition.

  6. "Don't sell our customer's data... by Aspasia13 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... that's our job!"

  7. Why collect it then? by Murdoch5 · · Score: 2

    They intentionally collected mass amounts of data, for the sole purpose of tracking and distributing that data to other companies. If they didn't want the data shared they would of either not collected it, or made the data functionally useless to the other parties, through encryption, hashing or other means of obfuscation.

    1. Re:Why collect it then? by swillden · · Score: 1

      They intentionally collected mass amounts of data, for the sole purpose of tracking and distributing that data to other companies. If they didn't want the data shared they would of either not collected it, or made the data functionally useless to the other parties, through encryption, hashing or other means of obfuscation.

      I'm confused... who is the "they" you're referring to? Google didn't collect the data, T-Mobile and Sprint did. Google asked them not to sell it.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  8. Awww, Google has competition for evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Feel sorry for Google.

    They have the SADZ because others are being evil with their surreptitious data collection.

  9. Re:THIS IS A JOKE by beanpoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, Google does not sell customer data. Google sells access to eyeballs. They will deliver ads to eyeballs that fit the metrics that an advertiser specifies, but the advertiser isn't provided with the details of who is behind that eyeball.

  10. Google isn't evil, people are just cheapskates by foxalopex · · Score: 1

    I find it disappointing that people expect "free" services like Gmail, YouTube and Google Search and somehow expect it to be free when in reality systems like that cost millions of dollars to run / maintain and upgrade. It's like getting free coffee but complaining that the paper cup has advertising on it. The trade-off is to have to pay for everything.

    1. Re:Google isn't evil, people are just cheapskates by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Are you really so naive as to be unaware that the objection is not to the display of advertising itself, but the invasive and deceitful ways they acquire data to target those ads, and the reselling of that data to third parties?
      I don't mind that GMail shows me ads, I mind that Google tracks me by GPS and logs every site I visit.
      I don't mind that Facebook shows me ads, I mind that they steal my private photos and contacts without permission. (There's lots of talk about the latter, but the former should be by far the bigger outrage... the Facebook app uploads your recent pictures, and not just ones taken through their app-- whatever the system camera app took, to their servers, then asks if you want to share it... even if you don't I doubt they delete it.. no Facebook I don't want to share a picture of my dick to my family; and the only way to stop this behavior is to disable access to media, which also blocks sharing the photos you *do* want to share).

    2. Re:Google isn't evil, people are just cheapskates by ChatHuant · · Score: 1

      I find it disappointing that people expect "free" services like Gmail, YouTube and Google Search and somehow expect it to be free when in reality systems like that cost millions of dollars to run / maintain and upgrade.

      You only find it "disappointing" because your understanding of the issue is incorrect and your information incomplete.
      This is absolutely not a fair exchange, where people choose to use Google's services and pay with their privacy. People aren't snooped on as a result of them using the free services - that would imply a choice, and with Google there is no choice. Google collects data on everybody, all the time, including people who don't use any of their services. Nobody can choose to not use GMail or whatever, and stop the tracking. All you can do as a normal person is fight a rear-guard action to maintain some privacy here and there, by rooting your phone, avoiding all of Google's services, blocking their sites, paying cash at stores (because Google collects your credit card purchases too, even though you don't use any of their services to make a payment). But there is no opt out from the snooping - online or offline.

    3. Re:Google isn't evil, people are just cheapskates by matt.dunleavy · · Score: 1

      Seeing the name "fafalone" just took me into a fucking time machine... Tell me you're not the dude from AOL/AIM private chat VB5...

  11. Should by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    I question whether, if this data is sold, if bounty hunters are people who "should not have it", but otherwise...

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  12. Carefully chosen words by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    "We have never sold Fi subscribers' location information,"

    See how specific this sentence is? "We have never sold FI subscribers' location information". They didn't say they never sell customer information just not FI location information. If the subscriber has, say, a Google account as well and they are logged in to that account on their FI phone well that's an entirely different conversation.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  13. Only the ad company by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    gets to track it's users.
    Enjoy that free tracking with the free OS, browser, search engine.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"