• Uh-oh: Google Tracked iPhones Without Anyone’s Permission
    29 replies, posted
A report from the Wall Street Journal suggests that Google has been bypassing the privacy settings of millions of Safari users, by tracking the browsing habits of people, even if they thought they had blocked such monitoring. The WSJ explains how Google has developed code that installs cookies on a users' device—without their permission—from adverts contained in web pages. Once installed, however, those cookies have allowed Google to track browsing across the majority of websites. Research by the WSJ showed that the code was present in adverts on Fandango.com, Match.com, AOL.com, TMZ.com and UrbanDictionary.com, among others, and that it worked on both desktop and mobile versions of Safari. In a statement, Google told the WSJ: However, since the WSJ informed Google that it was aware of the practice, Google has disabled the feature on their servers. An Apple representative has said that the company is "working to put a stop" to the privacy invasion. The code in question stems from the development of Google+, being developed to skirt the way Safari blocked an original implementation of the "+1" button on third-party websites. Instead of directly using cookies, which Safari doesn't allow without user consent, the code made Safari think that a person was submitting an invisible form to Google. Sneaky. Then, Google had free reign to add cookies—and track a user's browsing—without the user ever knowing. It's an old exploit, first dug up back in 2010 by Anant Garg. Which means that while Apple may well be working on a stop now, they certainly havent been in any rush these last two years. Which is a shame, and puts more than a little blame in its court for leaving gate unlocked. This is the latest in a string of concerns over Google's privacy policy, all of which seem to fly in the face of their own maxim "Don't be evil". Update: Rachel Whetstone, Senior Vice President of Communications and Public Policy at Google has since said: "The Journal mischaracterizes what happened and why. We used known Safari functionality to provide features that signed-in Google users had enabled. It's important to stress that these advertising cookies do not collect personal information. "Unlike other major browsers, Apple's Safari browser blocks third-party cookies by default. However, Safari enables many web features for its users that rely on third parties and third-party cookies, such as "Like" buttons. Last year, we began using this functionality to enable features for signed-in Google users on Safari who had opted to see personalized ads and other content—such as the ability to "+1" things that interest them. "To enable these features, we created a temporary communication link between Safari browsers and Google's servers, so that we could ascertain whether Safari users were also signed into Google, and had opted for this type of personalization. But we designed this so that the information passing between the user's Safari browser and Google's servers was anonymous—effectively creating a barrier between their personal information and the web content they browse. "However, the Safari browser contained functionality that then enabled other Google advertising cookies to be set on the browser. We didn't anticipate that this would happen, and we have now started removing these advertising cookies from Safari browsers. It's important to stress that, just as on other browsers, these advertising cookies do not collect personal information." [url]http://gizmodo.com/5885929/googles-iphone-privacy-invasion[/url]
Gotta track the enemy somehow.
"It's important to stress that, just as on other browsers, these advertising cookies do not collect personal information." Umm... who cares?
From read their response, it looks like Google used the built-in functionality designed for things like Facebook and such to collect anonymous information from people with a Google account, but unintentionally allowed the ads to do the same thing.
Oh no
Not even apple can save you from the botnet Oh and people who claim that ios is better than Android because they don't like being tracked can now shut up forever
Google has been too much of the good guy in the past that this does not phase me.
[QUOTE=meppers;34743403]Not even apple can save you from the botnet Oh and people who claim that ios is better than Android because they don't like being tracked can now shut up forever[/QUOTE] Whoopty do, Google collect analytical data, this has been known forever. Android is used because it is filled with more features out of the box and it allows very easy and open development on whatever you want.
How much Google cares, absolutely zero. How much Apple and their users will bitch about it, a shitload
It's opt-in and nobody would opt-in on purpose anyways. They basically blinded everyone who wanted to track users, forcing them to change their methods. It would happen with any widely used browser. I can't really think of a solution that would benefit both. I'm all for analytical tracking, but not for ad related tracking, so... welp.
[QUOTE=garychencool;34744686]How much Google cares, absolutely zero. How much Apple and their users will bitch about it, a shitload[/QUOTE] Lets switch this around, Now apple is suing your phone manufacturer. "How much Apple cares, absolutely zero. How much Google and their users will bitch about it, a shitload."
MY GOD! They have all my browsing history! All the porn sites I didn't visit because the iPhone has a fucking tiny screen compared to my PC! LE GASP!
[QUOTE=KarloMcMarlo;34746777]MY GOD! They have all my browsing history! All the porn sites I didn't visit because the iPhone has a fucking tiny screen compared to my PC! LE GASP![/QUOTE] It gets the job done.
[QUOTE=KarloMcMarlo;34746777]MY GOD! They have all my browsing history! All the porn sites I didn't visit because the iPhone has a fucking tiny screen compared to my PC! LE GASP![/QUOTE] Not to mention without flash player its almost useless for porn.
[QUOTE=inconspicious;34747196]Not to mention without flash player is almost useless for porn.[/QUOTE] I couldn't help but laugh when I saw your username after reading your post
[QUOTE=BaconMan_lol;34743447]Google has been too much of the good guy in the past that this does not phase me.[/QUOTE] This is kinda like spiderman accidentally hurting a bystander for once
[QUOTE=garychencool;34744686]How much Google cares, absolutely zero. How much Apple and their users will bitch about it, a shitload[/QUOTE] being the mature iphone 4s user that I am, I've noticed android users bitch more than us
And zero fucks were given.. Also op's avatar is pretty much perfect.
I thought that when you hit "agree" on their ToS, you pretty much let them do this
[QUOTE=Lemonator;34747588]being the mature iphone 4s user that I am, I've noticed android users bitch more than us[/QUOTE] I actually rarely hear iphone users complaining about how bad android is, Just users telling them they are dumbasses for using a shit OS. Why can't we all just let eachother enjoy our stuff.
Safari is fucking terrible anyways, Opera on the other hand, works wonders.
Considering this only affects Safari, I'm more inclined to say that this is Apple's fault but it's much more sensational news to blame Google.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;34757237]Considering this only affects Safari, I'm more inclined to say that this is Apple's fault but it's much more sensational news to blame Google.[/QUOTE] It isn't. It circumvents Safari's privacy settings (which are by default set to accept only cookies the user requests by using a form or something alike) in order to create a cookie.
[QUOTE=inconspicious;34747196]Not to mention without flash player its almost useless for porn.[/QUOTE] which is why a majority of the larger porn sites have mobile sites that don't use flash?
[QUOTE=Murkrow;34757257]It isn't. It circumvents Safari's privacy settings (which are by default set to accept only cookies the user requests by using a form or something alike) in order to create a cookie.[/QUOTE]So safari is buggy?
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;34758220]So safari is buggy?[/QUOTE] No, google tricks it into thinking that the user is sending a form when he clicks an ad to make a tracking cookie, but it shouldn't be a form, just a link.
[QUOTE=Lemonator;34747588]being the mature iphone 4s user that I am, I've noticed android users bitch more than us[/QUOTE] I refrain from saying a lot when some applelite faps on a facebook post about their new device. Most of the time if they try to start something I avoid it cause its a stupid argument to have. On facebook though I just post "I'm sorry" and move on. "Just got my new Macbook Pro! :D I love apple!" 'I'm sorry' [editline]18th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=areolop;34748007]I thought that when you hit "agree" on their ToS, you pretty much let them do this[/QUOTE] Ohmygod this so hard. People whine and complain about what a company does and how they shouldn't be allowed to do so, yet you [I]told them they could.[/I] Best part is when they say "I did not!" and you respond with "you clicked 'I Agree' didn't you? Thats a contract that you signed saying they could do that."
so Google knowingly bypassed Safari's cookie blocker in order to make their Google+ content work properly but taking advantage of this exploit ended up giving their ad cookies the same ability? i'm not very happy about them letting these ad cookies use the same exploit but idk, i'm inclined to believe Google considering how tame of a company they've been in the past regarding privacy and all that. [editline]18th February 2012[/editline] also personalized ads are fucking wicked
[QUOTE=Lemonator;34747588]being the mature iphone 4s user that I am, I've noticed android users bitch more than us[/QUOTE] anecdotal evidence isnt worth anything at all
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;34759979]anecdotal evidence isnt worth anything at all[/QUOTE] Out of curiosity... According to who?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.