$5 Billion Lawsuit Accuses Google of Tracking Chrome Users in Incognito Mode

[gatorguy2]

FWIW Apple's Private Mode isn't actually private either based on the complaint.

Apple: "When you use Private Browsing, you can visit websites without creating a search history in Safari". Google Incognito does the same.

Apple: "Private Browsing protects your private information and blocks SOME websites from tracking your search behavior. Safari won't remember the pages you visit, your search history, or your AutoFill information." Again, Google Incognito does the same.

 

[Prof.]

Do... do they not know incognito is only meant for teenage boys so they can hide their porn from the rest of the family?

 

[andyring]

Tracking pixel is like Syphilis... a single bacterium (1) is enough to mess you up and brutally and mercilessly kill you over time. The only way to really stay save is to stay away from the Internet, just never plug in.

Or use DNS servers not from your ISP. Use Cloudflare's or similar. And spend a few $ for a VPN connection. Makes you much, much more difficult to track.

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

Another red herring. Telecomm companies and ISPs already gather everything you do online.

 

[kemal]

You are using Chrome...? You should be sued!

 

[Chaos215bar2]

Anyone who believed that an advertising company was being honest about their privacy policies is nothing short of bonkers.

In other news, ISP's likely do the same. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And this makes this sort of behavior ok because?

 

[swm]

In other news, ISP's likely do the same. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

except that they can't. they might collect your DNS queries, but that's all. but chrome sits on one end of the HTTPS pipe, so they have unrestricted access to all content and metadata your download. and boy, they have perfect opportunity to conceal anything they want to send back to their infra.

so it's really up to Google's 'word' that they won't do it.

 

[Detnator]

And this makes this sort of behavior ok because?

i don’t think he’s saying it’s ok. I think he’s just saying we shouldn’t be surprised.

That said, apparently it’s legal, even if not moral. So it seems there’s not a lot we can actually do about it and this case isn’t likely to get far.

Disclaimer: That’s all just my opinion. I don’t consider myself any authority on any of this. I may well be way off.

 

[ian87w]

Precisely why I never bother using "Incognito mode" on Chrome.

I believe it's the same for any browser, unless you enable actual extensions to block tracking during incognito mode. The idea of incognito mode is to prevent local cookies and history to be saved after your browsing session. It has nothing to do with the privacy policies of the websites.

Maybe it's just me, but I never take incognito mode to be anything else other than that, for the browser to not save my browsing history.

 

[Mick-Mac]

Anybody using "free" software that companies spend tons of money developing and maintaining is being data mined. It's just that simple. It boggles my mind that people believe otherwise. For that very reason, I pay for my software/services because (ideally) that means I have actual rights to my data. The one thing that does burn me up is my paid for subscriptions to my ISP - those guys secretly also do data mining and should be drawn and quartered for it. But I guess they spend zillions on lobbying and paying off politicians so that apparently makes it all OK...

 

[shplock]

Sounds like some tech handicapped person just doesn’t understand what incognito mode means. Next

Sounds like some intelligence handicapped person does not understand what privacy means. Next.
[automerge]1591198944[/automerge]

Here's what you see when you enter incognito mode. You tell me if you think there's disclosure.
View attachment 921216



None of this editorializing has anything to do with incognito mode. People who use incognito mode should know and understand what it is and what it does. More importantly, they should understand what it does not do.

And the point is that Goolge should be made aware of what they can and can not do rather than seemingly intrude on people's privacy than the CIA.
[automerge]1591199322[/automerge]

How I imagine this going:

Lawyer: ‘With all due respect your honour, I’m hiding my face behind my briefcase so I am now Incognito - how can you possibly know I’m even in the courtroom!?’

Judge: ‘case dismissed.’

How I imagine this going:

Google defence lawyer: "Your honour, we at Google have not and never will invade any person's privacy as we have vowed to do no evil and further more we strenuously deny the charges levelled at us"

Judge: "I will now hear the opening argument from the plaintiff"

Google defence lawyer: " Just one more thing your honour but here is a little gift from us at Google, it's a cracking deal on a holiday to Australia for you, your wife and two children next month"

Judge: "How the f%&# did you know that, I only searched for flights to Australia this morning?"

Google defence lawyer: "Er, well that is to say ummm"

Judge: "I award $5 billion damages to the plaintiff"

 

[Chaos215bar2]

i don’t think he’s saying it’s ok. I think he’s just saying we shouldn’t be surprised.

That said, apparently it’s legal, even if not moral. So it seems there’s not a lot we can actually do about it and this case isn’t likely to get far.

Disclaimer: That’s all just my opinion. I don’t consider myself any authority on any of this. I may well be way off.

I disagree. By calling people “bonkers” for expecting their privacy to be respected, that's clearly setting the expectation that privacy will not be respected. The same goes for declaring that “there’s not a lot we can actually do about it”.

There's plenty we can do. We can make noise, for one. Enough noise and lawmakers will listen. This has been demonstrated time and again throughout history. We can also choose not to use products from companies that behave this way. Sure, that's inconvenient and maybe even painful (in a mental sense), but it's absolutely an option.

In accepting this sort of behavior as normal, we only allow it to continue.

 

[Detnator]

I disagree. By calling people “bonkers” for expecting their privacy to be respected, that's clearly setting the expectation that privacy will not be respected. The same goes for declaring that “there’s not a lot we can actually do about it”.

There's plenty we can do. We can make noise, for one. Enough noise and lawmakers will listen. This has been demonstrated time and again throughout history. We can also choose not to use products from companies that behave this way. Sure, that's inconvenient and maybe even painful (in a mental sense), but it's absolutely an option.

In accepting this sort of behavior as normal, we only allow it to continue.

Yes. Fair points. My “not a lot we can do about it” is in a somewhat narrow context. Agreed we can do all the things you’ve mentioned. I choose to use Apple stuff (esp. Safari) as much as possible for this reason. I understand that doesn’t solve everything of course but it’s still better than Chrome. Then I’m stuck with some web apps that require Chrome - a medical one in particular, where my privacy is most important. Go figure. Sigh.

That said, in today’s world, it’s reasonable to expect that politicians aren’t usually honest and if you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it sooner or later someone will steal it.

Those behaviors are not ok, but they’re still “normal” and “expected” and to think otherwise is to be living in a fantasy. So I think it’s reasonable to realize and expect that companies like Google aren’t going to respect privacy. Still not ok, and we should fight it in the ways you describe and others. But the poster’s description that it’s bonkers to expect privacy from Google is pretty reasonable, I think.

Then again this light just be a debate about semantics at this point.

 

[Chaos215bar2]

Yes. Fair points. My “not a lot we can do about it” is in a somewhat narrow context. Agreed we can do all the things you’ve mentioned. I choose to use Apple stuff (esp. Safari) as much as possible for this reason. I understand that doesn’t solve everything of course but it’s still better than Chrome. Then I’m stuck with some web apps that require Chrome - a medical one in particular, where my privacy is most important. Go figure. Sigh.

That said, in today’s world, it’s reasonable to expect that politicians aren’t usually honest and if you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it sooner or later someone will steal it.

Those behaviors are not ok, but they’re still “normal” and “expected” and to think otherwise is to be living in a fantasy. So I think it’s reasonable to realize and expect that companies like Google aren’t going to respect privacy. Still not ok, and we should fight it in the ways you describe and others. But the poster’s description that it’s bonkers to expect privacy from Google is pretty reasonable, I think.

Then again this light just be a debate about semantics at this point.

“Expected”, maybe, depending on the precise circumstances and the sense in which you're using the term. If you're saying that stealing cars is “normal”, given the opportunity, I vehemently disagree.

To say that we should expect companies to violate our privacy simply admits defeat before we've even begun, and places the blame squarely on the end user. That's not the right way to look at this. You should certainly assume this will happen, depending on the circumstance, and operate appropriately. That doesn't mean that it's your fault when a company does violate your trust, or that you shouldn't be upset about it.

I'll admit it's a fine distinction, but I think it's an important one.

 

[Detnator]

“Expected”, maybe, depending on the precise circumstances and the sense in which you're using the term. If you're saying that stealing cars is “normal”, I vehemently disagree.

To say that we should expect companies to violate our privacy simply admits defeat before we've even begun, and places the blame squarely on the end user. That's not the right way to look at this. You should certainly assume this will happen, depending on the circumstance, and operate appropriately. That doesn't mean that it's your fault when a company does violate your trust, or that you shouldn't be upset about it.

You’re correct. Stealing cars is not normal. But having your car stolen sooner or later, by someone, if you leave it unlocked with the keys visibly in it, is normal I think. So much so that none of us in our right minds leave our cars like that.

We’re probably splitting hairs now with the privacy stuff. I essentially agree with you. The distinction between expect and assume is fair enough. And yes it’s not our fault and we’ve done no wrong if our privacy is violated by Google, etc. But nor have we done any wrong or are to “blame” if we leave our car unlocked etc. but someone steals it...? 😉

 

[Chaos215bar2]

You’re correct. Stealing cars is not normal. But having your car stolen sooner or later, by someone, if you leave it unlocked with the keys visibly in it, is normal I think. So much so that none of us in our right minds leave our cars like that.

I'm guessing you live in a city? There's definitely nothing normal about having a car stolen, in general, even if I would go so far as to say that that's the expected outcome in certain areas.

I'll admit, I'm willing to be a lot more forgiving of the behavior of one individual, who can very reasonably be expected to, on occasion, make a rash, in the moment decision, than I am of a large corporation where many people have to be involved in every decision. Individual people do stupid things, some with thought, and some without. Large corporations do not act without at least thinking they understand exactly what they're doing, and how it will impact their business model and bottom line.

 

[Jimmy James]

I suppose they also think incognito hides their activity from their isp and people looking over their shoulder.

 

[rgbrock1]

$5b is a speeding ticket in comparison to the amount of money they'll have generated from that system. Anyone who believed that an advertising company was being honest about their privacy policies is nothing short of bonkers.

In other news, ISP's likely do the same. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If you use a VPN client, ISPs see nothing.
[automerge]1591207454[/automerge]

Precisely why I never bother using "Incognito mode" on Chrome.

Precisely why I never use ANY Google product... period.
[automerge]1591207829[/automerge]

Another red herring. Telecomm companies and ISPs already gather everything you do online.

Ah, no. If you use a VPN your ISP cannot track what you do online at all.
[automerge]1591208034[/automerge]

I disagree. By calling people “bonkers” for expecting their privacy to be respected, that's clearly setting the expectation that privacy will not be respected. The same goes for declaring that “there’s not a lot we can actually do about it”.

There's plenty we can do. We can make noise, for one. Enough noise and lawmakers will listen. This has been demonstrated time and again throughout history. We can also choose not to use products from companies that behave this way. Sure, that's inconvenient and maybe even painful (in a mental sense), but it's absolutely an option.

In accepting this sort of behavior as normal, we only allow it to continue.

Exactly: spot on. Which is the reason why I avail myself of not one single Google product or service. None.

 

[Mick-Mac]

Exactly: spot on. Which is the reason why I avail myself of not one single Google product or service. None.

Which is all well and good (and exactly what I do too), but your ISP is still data mining you. Opting out of using those guys is sadly not optional :-(.

 

[UnusedLoginID]

They might as well sue for $1T and shut down Google entirely.
That’s Google’s “modus operandi”!
And it’s not like the data is tracked “incognito”, we all know they track you!

 

[Chaos215bar2]

Which is all well and good (and exactly what I do too), but your ISP is still data mining you. Opting out of using those guys is sadly not optional :-(.

That's where my comment about making noise comes into play. (That, and the slow but consistent move towards encrypting everything.)

ISPs have repeatedly complained to lawmakers that their ability to collect data on their customers is limited in one way or another, pointing to Google and Facebook as “competitors” and literal examples of what they'd like to do. The only way to counter that is to make it clear that the public is watching, and that any person in a position of power should think twice before enabling that sort of behavior, lest they be removed from office by whatever means is appropriate.

Of course, it would be great if we could go one step further and actually regulate ISPs to the point that there's real competition. But in the mean time, most people literally have no option but to do business with whichever company serves as the gatekeeper to the internet in their region.

 

[Mick-Mac]

Wouldn't it be great if Apple was also an ISP - those guys I trust to take my money (boy do I trust they'll do that!) and maintain my privacy.

 

[Deliro]

Another red herring. Telecomm companies and ISPs already gather everything you do online.

Thus why I have VPN on my router. Sure not 100%, but it does a good job hiding my activity from the ISP. Not that I care that they know.

 

[DoctorTech]

Same here. I am using Google without being signed in, and almost never using incognito mode. It also done on separate Chromium builds (I have several browser for different needs). Best way using Google products without me being a products, no targeted annoying ads.

"I have several browser for different needs" - Agreed. I have Chrome on my MBP but the ONLY thing I use it for is watching YouTube on my Premium account. Since I am already signed into YouTube, Google knows its me but I never use Google or YouTube from my Safari, FireFox or Cliqz browsers.

 

[WordsmithMR]

Was I the only one who assumed that the company who own's the browser would gather any data on you while incognito/private/whatever word they use for it? I mean, if our ISP still has access to what we are viewing, why on earth would I think that the information wouldn't get tracked for machine learning purposes for AdWords? But I guess I don't really care anymore as I only use Chrome at work. And I am phasing that out soon. Going to start installing Brave and default to DDG >_>