Google sinks into Safarigate

posted at 7:01 pm on February 16, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Web giant Google has gotten themselves into more than a little hot water of late.

Google Play has been automatically transmitting personal information of American customers to the developers of Android apps they buy, according to a trade group.

Such disclosures may violate a legally binding agreement the company made with the FTC that requires Google to obtain “express affirmative consent” from a customer before divulging such data.

“I have confirmed with developers here that you can see first and last names, ZIP code, city, state and country as well as email address” of customers, said Morgan Reed, executive director of the Association for Competitive Technology, the app developers’ trade group. “This information is provided through Google Checkout, and it is not information the developer ever requested from the purchaser directly.”

A Google spokeswoman declined to comment Wednesday.

Last year, Google drew attention for violating many of its users’ privacy, and not just in the standard manner that various critics claim social media does routinely. (i.e. which enables Facebook, Twitter, etc., to make money.) Google effectively engaged in spying on its users in contravention of the terms that applied to its contracts with them, attracting a record-breaking (but still relatively small) $22.5 million fine from the Obama administration’s Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Conveniently for Google– whose employees donated over $800k to Obama’s re-election campaign– the FTC also handled that matter in a way that prevents those users whose contracts were breached and whose privacy was violated by Google from suing the Internet behemoth, thus immunizing Google from being held to account for bad behavior in a more limited government, but potentially more effective fashion. (Rand Paul noted last summer that contract violations such as Google’s should not go unpunished, but that a class action lawsuit would have been the appropriate method of addressing the privacy violation in this instance).

Was that the end of it? Apparently not… and If you own an Android phone, you might want to look at this:

EVERY time you purchase an app on Google Play, your name, address and email is passed on to the developer, it has been revealed.

The “flaw” – which appears to be by design – was discovered by Sydney app developer, Dan Nolan who told news.com.au that he was uncomfortable being the custodian of this information and that there was no reason for any developer to have this information at their finger tips…

Mr Nolan told News.com.au that tens of millions of Google customers could be affected.

“As far as I can tell this impacts every person who purchased an app on the Play Store,” he said.

“I can’t see any way to opt out of providing that information and it seems to be a feature of the Google checkout process. I don’t know whether it applies to free apps, but there are hundreds of thousands of apps that are available for pay on the play store and there are millions of people who buy Android apps out there, I’d say easily millions or tens of millions of people.

“It’s active in every market that Google accepts payment for apps. That’s a lot of people having their personal information handed over without them knowing.” …

Google’s terms of service state that it may store your personal information including your name, address and billing details, but nowhere in its privacy statement does the company explicitly state that it passes on your personal information to developers, every time you purchase their app.

It appears from an update to the article linked that this situation has persisted since late October last year, and may be connected to the integration of Google+ into other Google properties.

What is Google doing about it? Google wouldn’t comment to the site that broke the news, so that remains unclear. However, it seems probable that the news will land the company in hot water again, with its customers, and potentially with the FTC.

Privacy and adherence to the terms of service– terms of Google’s contracts with customers– seem to be perennial problem areas for Google. As with any other breach of contract where damage has been suffered, suing them is probably fair game.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

As long as this company and others remain ‘pets’ of govt., they’ll get away with this as long as they pay said govt AHEM fines!!!

What a racket!

CoffeeLover on February 16, 2013 at 7:07 PM

I remember back when Google was the little upstart, and we rooted for them because they were using linux instead of the something from the Borg of Redmond. And they actually seemed to believe “Don’t be evil”.

Good times, good times. Sigh.

bofh on February 16, 2013 at 7:15 PM

Conveniently for Google– whose employees donated over $800k to Obama’s re-election campaign– the FTC also handled that matter in a way that prevents those users whose contracts were breached and whose privacy was violated by Google from suing the Internet behemoth, thus immunizing Google from being held to account for bad behavior in a more limited government, but potentially more effective fashion. (Rand Paul noted last summer that contract violations such as Google’s should not go unpunished, but that a class action lawsuit would have been the appropriate method of addressing the privacy violation in this instance).

Is the inclusion of the word “government” right after the word “limited” a Freudian slip?

If so, it’s quite an admirable one.

Maybe because you were about to say something about Rand Paul the next sentence?

RINO in Name Only on February 16, 2013 at 7:17 PM

Google is the biggest invader of Privacy on the planet. I don’t use Google as a search engine, nor do I own anything they are associated with. Totally in bed with this Administration and are behind any Federal Internet legislation imo.

They are Big Brother!!

bluefox on February 16, 2013 at 7:20 PM

The CEO of Google creeps me out. Puts off child molester vibes.

jawkneemusic on February 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM

CoffeeLover on February 16, 2013 at 7:07 PM

I hate that all of these “fines” always go to the Government and not to the customers/people that they have violated. Grrrrr…

bluefox on February 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM

Don’t be evil*

29Victor on February 16, 2013 at 7:27 PM

Good librals.

-Brayam

/

CW on February 16, 2013 at 7:27 PM

*evil being a relative term dependent entirely upon the particulars of a given situation, the advise of our lawyers, what we can get away with politically and how much money it will make us.

29Victor on February 16, 2013 at 7:30 PM

I view privacy laws as mandating that GOVERNMENTs not share your private information.

If Google can collect said information and market it — well and good. I don’t have to buy things from Google Store, and I don’t have to do searches using Google. There are any number of competitors willing to do both those things.

As for the vendors, well — if one of them uses the information they’ve been provided for nefarious purposes, then Google certainly has a problem — for I can sue them for providing the data which enabled the nefarious purpose.

The moment the Government gets involved, we see these fines which actually do little to make those damaged whole — it’s sort of like Jesse Jackson and Texaco, if you get my drift.

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:36 PM

for I can sue them for providing the data which enabled the nefarious purpose.

The moment the Government gets involved, we see these fines which actually do little to make those damaged whole — it’s sort of like Jesse Jackson and Texaco, if you get my drift.

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Dummy the judiciary is part of government.

CW on February 16, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Tangentially, I really despise how GoogleTube is frequently hitting me up with “SAY, WOULD U LIKE 2 CHANGE UR YOUTUBE HANDLE 2 UR REAL NAME (GMAIL)? EVERYBODY’S DOIN’ IT, SO Y ARENT U?” popups.

No, I do not want legions of morons on YouTube knowing my legal name, Eric Smith – thanks!

Jeddite on February 16, 2013 at 7:48 PM

What is Google doing about it? Google wouldn’t comment to the site that broke the news, so that remains unclear.

So being able to contact a Google spokesperson for comment is as easy as contacting a human at Google for technical support. Alrighty then. I’ll bet they have a cool android program that will provide a robotic answer to reporters though.

AZfederalist on February 16, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Wildfire by Google ‏@wildfireapp

[DEMO] How do top brands achieve social marketing success? With technology: http://bit.ly/154EsEX

Bmore on February 16, 2013 at 7:53 PM

And yet Google refused to help find Marizela Perez, the Boss Emeritus’ cousin, by witholding information about her Google searches.

Don’t be evil, indeed.

pookysgirl on February 16, 2013 at 7:54 PM

Dummy the judiciary is part of government.

CW on February 16, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Drats. At least we still have the two other branches….

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:56 PM

I remember back when Google was the little upstart, and we rooted for them because they were using linux instead of the something from the Borg of Redmond. And they actually seemed to believe “Don’t be evil”.

Good times, good times. Sigh.

bofh on February 16, 2013 at 7:15 PM

Good time, indeed. Long before Obama came onto the scene.

HiJack on February 16, 2013 at 7:59 PM

Drats. At least we still have the two other branches….

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:56 PM

I knew you were too stupid to get it.

Thanks for confirming it …though.

CW on February 16, 2013 at 8:02 PM

I remember back when Google was the little upstart, and we rooted for them because they were using linux instead of the something from the Borg of Redmond. And they actually seemed to believe “Don’t be evil”.

Good times, good times. Sigh.

bofh on February 16, 2013 at 7:15 PM

Good time, indeed. Long before Obama came onto the scene.

HiJack on February 16, 2013 at 7:59 PM

True, but even then Sergie Brinn and his cohorts were far leftist statists. They just liked the idea of being capitalists to get their money.

“Don’t be evil” indeed.

AZfederalist on February 16, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Do no evil.

VorDaj on February 16, 2013 at 8:04 PM

Don’t do evil unless it makes money.

VorDaj on February 16, 2013 at 8:05 PM

bing.com

RedNewEnglander on February 16, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Makes you wonder what information Chrome is gathering for Mordor?

sharrukin on February 16, 2013 at 8:10 PM

So that’s the visual legal approved? Mine was at least interesting.

Bmore on February 16, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Yes, I use Bing. I don’t trust Google. Maybe this, and other issues, is why Schmidt is dumping his shares.

eaglesdontflock on February 16, 2013 at 8:19 PM

The information Google has would be a very effective political tool.
Very effective!
Give the political bent of the company, and what we know of human nature, I would expect it to be used as some point if it has not been already.

MHatch on February 16, 2013 at 8:27 PM

Don’t trust Bing.

Bmore on February 16, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Mr. Shaw, why are you calling this “Safari-gate?” That was an entirely different matter. Safari is Apple’s browser; last year, Google was found to be bypassing Safari’s security settings so they could set cookies (which are used to track online activity). That scandal has absolutely nothing to do with this one. So come up with a different -gate. Google-gate would be good; they deserve some seriously bad PR from this.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 8:32 PM

If Google can collect said information and market it — well and good. I don’t have to buy things from Google Store, and I don’t have to do searches using Google. There are any number of competitors willing to do both those things.

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:36 PM

It seems that Google broke the contract with their customers. The customers should be able to sue them.

Gelsomina on February 16, 2013 at 8:35 PM

Drats. At least we still have the two other branches….

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:56 PM

I knew you were too stupid to get it.

Thanks for confirming it …though.

CW on February 16, 2013 at 8:02 PM

Mars Attacks

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 8:35 PM

DuckDuckGo is the only search engine I trust – no tracking – period.

bound4er on February 16, 2013 at 8:38 PM

Defending Google here:

Most online credit card transactions for purchases of real goods involve a transfer of the address of the user of that credit card. Just because these are digital goods, I don’t think my expectation of privacy would be any greater. I’m pretty well used to purchasing something from someone online and giving them a so-called “Billing Address.”

And I also was never promised by Google that they WOULDNT hand over my information. They never told me that.

Google never told me they were converting my dollars to GOOGLE CREDITS or something of a phony transaction that would go straight to Google.

When I purchase an app, on my bank statement, the payment is to the APP Developer, not Google.

I dunno.

jimmy the notable on February 16, 2013 at 8:42 PM

DuckDuckGo is the only search engine I trust – no tracking – period.

bound4er on February 16, 2013 at 8:38 PM

I use https://startpage.com/eng/ and it also doesn’t track.

sharrukin on February 16, 2013 at 8:42 PM

Yes, I use Bing. I don’t trust Google. Maybe this, and other issues, is why Schmidt is dumping his shares.

eaglesdontflock on February 16, 2013 at 8:19 PM

Are you kidding? Schmidt is the biggest reason you shouldn’t trust Google. But it’s not like Google will become less creepy when he’s gone. Google makes 90% of their money by selling your information. Get used to it.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Tangentially, I really despise how GoogleTube is frequently hitting me up with “SAY, WOULD U LIKE 2 CHANGE UR YOUTUBE HANDLE 2 UR REAL NAME (GMAIL)? EVERYBODY’S DOIN’ IT, SO Y ARENT U?” popups.

Jeddite on February 16, 2013 at 7:48 PM

I agree, of course, but it shouldn’t surprise you. Google’s primary business is selling information about you and me and everyone else. Your browsing and buying history becomes much more valuable when they can connect it with a real person. So of course they’re going to pester you until you finally give in.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 8:49 PM

Here’s what Schmidt thinks about your privacy:

With your permission, you give us more information about you, about your friends, and we can improve the quality of our searches. We don’t need you to type at all. We know where you are. We know where you’ve been. We can more or less know what you’re thinking about.

Of course, that’s Google-speak. Translated into English, “with your permission” means “without your knowledge”.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 8:55 PM

GoogleTube is frequently hitting me up with “SAY, WOULD U LIKE 2 CHANGE UR YOUTUBE HANDLE 2 UR REAL NAME (GMAIL)? EVERYBODY’S DOIN’ IT, SO Y ARENT U?” popups.

I gave them a phony “real” name….
Doesn’t everybody…..?
Actually, I would have no idea. But I was NOT gonna give them my own name. I gave them somebody else’s… someone I made up… years ago…

momodoom on February 16, 2013 at 8:56 PM

You mean when I buy an app from a developer that developer gets my information. . . . . . so basically its like every other place I buy goods with a credit card?

This information was known a long long time ago. No one bothered to get offended about it until this website “broke” the story.

thphilli on February 16, 2013 at 8:57 PM

Privacy and adherence to the terms of service– terms of Google’s contracts with customers– seem to be perennial problem areas for Google. As with any other breach of contract where damage has been suffered, suing them is probably fair game

…unless you are giving the information to JugEars and his people…and you are counting on the DOJ not getting involved!

KOOLAID2 on February 16, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Not surprising. Google ‘paid’ for protection. It got protection. That’s how things are handled in Chicago.

GarandFan on February 16, 2013 at 9:46 PM

You mean when I buy an app from a developer that developer gets my information. . . . . . so basically its like every other place I buy goods with a credit card?

thphilli on February 16, 2013 at 8:57 PM

When you use a credit card (such as Visa) at a brick-and-mortar store, the store gets no information on you at all except what is printed on the card (name, expiration, etc.). And the manufacturer of the items you bought doesn’t even get your name.

So tell me again how the two situations are similar.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 11:15 PM

This is why I don’t have a gmail account. I try to avoid google in my life. I also am very limited on facebook, too.

karenhasfreedom on February 16, 2013 at 11:30 PM

Don’t trust anyone, especially others.

Bmore on February 16, 2013 at 11:56 PM

Google doing evil.

besser tot als rot on February 16, 2013 at 11:57 PM

This story was debunked everywhere it was posted yesterday (and the original author himself had to edit his article to water down his bogus claim) so I’m surprised you guys chose to still run with it.

This is no different than PayPal, Amazon, or eBay which also provide your email, username, and address to the seller. In this case your email is linked to your Google account (just like how your Apple ID is used for license purposes in iOS). That way they can see who to whom they need to whitelist the license for the app.

Furthermore, Google’s Android platform goes the extra mile and tells you exactly which permissions are provided to the app before you install it – Apple sadly does not provide you the same courtesy. So if an app says it wants access to your accounts, Android will tell you this before you accept the install.

You know who else has your personal info including name, zip code, and last 4 digits of your debit/credit card?? Any store you’ve ever swiped your plastic at over the past 10 years. And yet you were perfectly cool with that until 5 minutes ago… go figure.

You guys are all hyperventilating at something that EVERYONE has been doing for the past decade.

Eschelon on February 17, 2013 at 2:31 AM

If customers are uncomfortable, they should switch to a different mobile platform.

It is much too easy for businesses to get into legal trouble. Sometimes I can’t believe anyone manages to turn a profit in this regulation rich environment.

Making more laws to try to regulate big corporations actually ensures the existence of them. Smaller players simply can’t cope with the plethora of fines, taxes, loopholes, and regulations; just one regulatory slip up and the associated fines may ruin a small business.

The only way to keep big corporations in check is actually fewer regulations and other barriers to entry, so small businesses can enter the market place and compete for market share.

Nephew Sam on February 17, 2013 at 2:34 AM

Eschelon on February 17, 2013 at 2:31 AM

Precisely. There are so many real issues, going nuts over something every electronic marketplace does is stupid. Pay for something with PayPal, Google Checkout, Amazon Marketplace or any other web payment service, and you provide a shipping address and name. Billing address, sorry. Why? Because the credit card company requires any online payee to collect that information for identity verification (read: fraud prevention) purposes.

Asurea on February 17, 2013 at 2:42 AM

When the machines come for us they will know where to look.

Sherman1864 on February 17, 2013 at 3:55 AM

If SkyNet takes over, my arse is going to be vapor or glowing, so I’m not very concerned about the machines lol

Asurea on February 17, 2013 at 4:18 AM

They paid for that information? The fools. They could have got it from the usual government source for a reasonable campaign donation. 24/7/365 campaigns need a lot of fuel and the push of a button or two solves that problem rather nicely.

Don L on February 17, 2013 at 5:37 AM

I view privacy laws as mandating that GOVERNMENTs not share your private information.

If Google can collect said information and market it — well and good. I don’t have to buy things from Google Store, and I don’t have to do searches using Google. There are any number of competitors willing to do both those things.

As for the vendors, well — if one of them uses the information they’ve been provided for nefarious purposes, then Google certainly has a problem — for I can sue them for providing the data which enabled the nefarious purpose.

The moment the Government gets involved, we see these fines which actually do little to make those damaged whole — it’s sort of like Jesse Jackson and Texaco, if you get my drift.

unclesmrgol on February 16, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Maybe you missed thinking about those retroactive waivers?

Don L on February 17, 2013 at 5:38 AM

THE STORIES ABOUT GOOGLE SENDING YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION TO APP DEVELOPERS IS SIMPLY UNTRUE.

Take a look at the screenshots that are posted from the App Developer console in this story. As for “no way to opt out” – the fact that your name (which doesn’t have to be real, btw) and your billing information will be send to the developer is in the Google WALLET EULA not the Play EULA since Wallet is the App you actually pay with.

http://www.droid-life.com/2013/02/14/potential-google-play-privacy-flaw-is-probably-nothing-to-worry-over/

A bunch of people writing stories about crap they HAVE NO FRIGGING IDEA ABOUT.

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:42 AM

No, I do not want legions of morons on YouTube knowing my legal name, Eric Smith – thanks!

You mean Eric Schmidt?

With smarts like yours, no wonder you wouldn’t want people to know who you are :P

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:45 AM

You mean when I buy an app from a developer that developer gets my information. . . . . . so basically its like every other place I buy goods with a credit card?

This information was known a long long time ago. No one bothered to get offended about it until this website “broke” the story.

thphilli on February 16, 2013 at 8:57 PM

I want to know when the hit piece on paypal is going to hit.

“OMFG THEY KNOW MY EMAIL ADDRESS!!!@$!%#!#%!#$!$!!!!!111 Evil Obama plot!!!!111″

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:48 AM

If customers are uncomfortable, they should switch to a different mobile platform.

You mean like that company who tracked “inadvertently” your every position without you even knowing about it? Yeah that rotten fruit company.

The same one that ties your Apple Device ID to your personal information in their iTunes database so that they can do what they want with that data?

People getting all worried who is doing what with their data need to get with the now. We’ve all got digital footprints on the internet. Even just by visiting this website from your browser, the server admins / domain registrar at hotair.com who would be:

Salem Communications Corporation
Scott Hunter
4880 Santa Rosa Road
Camarillo, CA 93012
US
Phone: +1.8059870400
Email: domainregistration@salem.cc

Can pull your location, what operating system you’re using, what browser and version, what network you’re on (which gives you the physical location) and then much, much more.

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:53 AM

Here’s another article by people who actually know what it is they’re talking about saying “Whats the big deal people”?

http://phandroid.com/2013/02/14/developer-information-security/

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:55 AM

It seems that Google broke the contract with their customers. The customers should be able to sue them.

Gelsomina on February 16, 2013 at 8:35 PM

False. The sharing of customer data is in the google Wallet EULA which you have to agree to before you can purchase apps/music/stuff on the Play Store.

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:57 AM

Don’t be evil*

29Victor on February 16, 2013 at 7:27 PM

If getting information that is required for basic billing purposes is evil, then consider the whole e-commerce industry the 8th ring of hell.

I thought we conservatives were capable of independent thought outside the media spin that’s spoonfed to us.

…unless it happens to fit in with our “media template … then its ok to be a bobblehead.

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:59 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:42 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:45 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:48 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:53 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:55 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:57 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 7:59 AM

Uh huh.

sharrukin on February 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM

Uh huh.

sharrukin on February 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM

Do you have something to say or are you complaining that I contributed my opinion to the conversation?

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Precisely. There are so many real issues, going nuts over something every electronic marketplace does is stupid. Pay for something with PayPal, Google Checkout, Amazon Marketplace or any other web payment service, and you provide a shipping address and name. Billing address, sorry. Why? Because the credit card company requires any online payee to collect that information for identity verification (read: fraud prevention) purposes.

Asurea on February 17, 2013 at 2:42 AM

Unless you donated to Barack Obama’s campaign- in which case these standard features were turned off.

Buy Danish on February 17, 2013 at 9:49 AM

Defenestratus on February 17, 2013 at 9:38 AM

I think your “OMFG etc etc” rant and the eagerness to show all of us that you’re tech-savvy because you know what WHOis does uncovered you as the regular teenage idiot roaming freakbook and youtube all day long.

If I want to make fun of the Indonesian resident of the WH (when not on holiday) on some of the “cool” lefty sites, I can always use proxy servers or/and TOR browser so the regular monkey will know nothing. I hope you did it too coming here, because otherwise we know who you are. Bhahahahaha!

Rookie on February 17, 2013 at 10:22 AM

When you use a credit card (such as Visa) at a brick-and-mortar store, the store gets no information on you at all except what is printed on the card (name, expiration, etc.). And the manufacturer of the items you bought doesn’t even get your name.

So tell me again how the two situations are similar.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 11:15 PM

I’ve returned things to stores, and they’ve credited my account (the credit card I used to purchase the stuff) by knowing just my name and address.

Frys Electronics will ask your credit card number, and if you give them the wrong one, they will refuse to credit you until you give them the correct one. They’re also able to issue duplicate receipts — they keep track of your EVERY purchase from them.

Amazon has a mode where your credit card information is tied to your user identity, and you can use “single click to purchase” modes. In addition, if you leave a review for an item, an indication of whether you purchased the item on Amazon is also displayed.

Finally, on Ebay, the seller certainly does know your name and address — for that information is required for them to ship you what you’ve bought. And Ebay keeps your purchase history so you (and, ostensibly, others) can examine it — including their automated “you might like this” engine.

I have no expectations of privacy when I go online. Absolutely none at all. And I haven’t been disappointed to date.

So a lot of retailers have differing policies on what information they keep.

unclesmrgol on February 17, 2013 at 10:45 AM

It seems that Google broke the contract with their customers. The customers should be able to sue them.

Gelsomina on February 16, 2013 at 8:35 PM

Of course. Preferably in a class action lawsuit involving millions of dollars, because each individual action is worth pennies but taken together, a liberal attorney can make quite a decent living.

unclesmrgol on February 17, 2013 at 10:49 AM

Maybe you missed thinking about those retroactive waivers?

Don L on February 17, 2013 at 5:38 AM

You are absolutely right — given that I have no idea what a retroactive waiver means in this case. The closest I can get to that thought is “Your continued use of this capability allows us to .”

But I have thought it through. I assume that Google is recording my every search, they are keeping my every e-mail, and I further assume that they WILL be doing something nefarious with the information. I’ve no doubt they have petabytes of data.

After all, that’s what I do on my home bastion server — record every access, both from the interior network and from the exterior, by IP, MAC, and port.

No expectations of privacy. None at all.

unclesmrgol on February 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Google makes 90% of their money by selling your information. Get used to it.

Splashman on February 16, 2013 at 8:43 PM

90% sounds like a really low number. I always thought it was in the 95-97% range, right up with the Zuckerburg Death Star.

Google really has little to no offerings that are profitable in any sense of the word (YouTube the likely exception) and yet, they have “Google Ad Sense” on many websites for nearly 10 years. Those are filtered by aggregates from personal searches, something that, IIRC, Facebook took a lot of cues from.

BTW, I’m writing this on an iPad. :p

Myron Falwell on February 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I gave them a phony “real” name….
Doesn’t everybody…..?
Actually, I would have no idea. But I was NOT gonna give them my own name. I gave them somebody else’s… someone I made up… years ago…

momodoom on February 16, 2013 at 8:56 PM

I have no problem giving them my real name — Joe Bleau: nobody believes it anyway…

affenhauer on February 17, 2013 at 3:48 PM