Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Under Fire for Circumvention of Cookie Settings in Safari for iOS to Track Users
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think Apple's the embarassed guy here... leaving open that loophole in Webkit on Safari is not very clever. Maybe they should work more closely with Google on webkit (their browsers are the major Webkit actors down there) to let each other benefit of each improvement/bug correction found by the other. it would improve cross-browser compatibility and the overall security on the internet - while comforting Webkit as the best engine in the world.
Plus it's embarassing for them to post a software update to correct that, they prefer firing at Google. Whereas Google can silently update Chrome without a pop-up... and take advantage of the loophole to collect benign information (anonymous tracking).
Plus it's embarassing for them to post a software update to correct that, they prefer firing at Google. Whereas Google can silently update Chrome without a pop-up... and take advantage of the loophole to collect benign information (anonymous tracking).
Definitely: It is a non issue. Its a story just to get people wound up.
The fact that Google don't collect personal information and have fixed the issue, would suggest that Google weren't doing this for 'underhanded' reasons.
People didn't generally dislike Google on these boards until SJ said so....
I'd like to know what the loophole is for. In the articles it's characterized as a feature to allow advertizers to track something after the ad has been clicked. This may be used in getting the site, advertizer, or agency paid. Not sure, I want more information on that.
However, it seems me the loophole is allowing the invisible form submission. I also want to know why Safari is allowing such a thing on sites, especially sites that seem to have injected the "ad" from a 3rd party website. Is the invisible form coded on the page that injected the ad or is the ad injecting the form?
If any third party website can put an auto submit form on a page, that seems like the real security hole here in Safari. However, an outfit like Google using it to track users is equally frightening to me because I would only expect this behavior from nigerian princesses.
However, it seems me the loophole is allowing the invisible form submission. I also want to know why Safari is allowing such a thing on sites, especially sites that seem to have injected the "ad" from a 3rd party website. Is the invisible form coded on the page that injected the ad or is the ad injecting the form?
If any third party website can put an auto submit form on a page, that seems like the real security hole here in Safari. However, an outfit like Google using it to track users is equally frightening to me because I would only expect this behavior from nigerian princesses.
So it's ok that Apple has been allowing apps to send your entire contact information up to a 3rd party vendor but yet if google is tracking your website visits for 12-24 hours - THEY are evil.
Ok. No double standard there. Not at all. Nope.
Just wow.
Ok. No double standard there. Not at all. Nope.
Just wow.
Lets be fair here, safari is only a major browser on iOS, its in no way a major browser on the desktop. Chrome's marketshare is significantly north of Safari's!
except Apple didnt do this. their browser blocks this type of activity by default.
This one time, I was building my new mountain bike, and I accidentally built a sidewinder missile out of it instead. Imagine my embarrassment. Lordy lordy...
What if you don't want the google?.. I never signed up for that! I don't think it would work with Camino though.. Never had any problem with that browser.
Back to the drawing board, google!
Back to the drawing board, google!
I used to like and respect Google. I stopped respecting Google not because of what Steve Jobs said, but because of their and their executives actions...and once I stop respecting them, I choose to dislike them. Too bad you don't grant people with different opinions the respect that they may be able to make up their own minds.
I did begin to dislike Flash when Steve mentioned it, but that's because I stopped, looked and started to realize how many crashes I would suffer whenever I was using it. But it was all Steve's fault, right?
"to provide features that signed-in Google users had enabled"
This is why it's a pretty non-story.
I love that fAndroid nerds are blaming Apple for this: "It's clearly Apple's fault for leaving such a large loophole. How could Google not exploit it?"
"It's clearly Mr. Jones' fault that his car got stolen, your honor. He left the keys in the car. How could I not steal it?"
"It's clearly Mr. Jones' fault that his car got stolen, your honor. He left the keys in the car. How could I not steal it?"
"Because millions of signed-in Google users would totally be okay with us secretly tracking their every move. That's just science."
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all, the COOKIE lasts up to 24 hours...nothing prevents Google from storing that information for as long as it wants on the server. Cookies are sent from the browser to the server with every request. Now, they say that don't do that...but a company that would use this technique could do anything it wanted on its back-end and how would you know?
To be fair google does allow you to tell it what you want to allow to track or not. But they also can be sneaky about stuff too in order to trick you into things as well (basically, if you know how or look, Google does allow you to stop most of their tracking, but if you don't pay attention or let your guard down, you'll end up allowing htem stuff... For example every time a cookie expires on my computer that logs me into G+ they give me this message that uses a little FUD about, "If you don't give us your number you might lose your info" and has a very tiny little skip button (if I wasn't so adamant about not giving my number out I might have assumed it wasn't there but I was dead set on no) and if you find it, they give you a message bolding the "No, I was wrong, I do want to give you the number" button and making the other button subtle.
They're like lawyers that way (technically we do allow you control over your privacy, but you gotta watch us cause we'll find loopholes so we can say we allowed it but you chose to do it this way).
They're still better than companies like Facebook though (that even if you delete your account still tracks you!).
Last edited by a moderator:
I could be wrong here but I thought the majority of people like products, not companies. I happen to like Gmail and a lot of Apple products, but that has no bearing on whether I like the company or not. I buy Green & Black's butterscotch chocolate because I like it, but that has absolutely no correlation with how I feel about Kraft as a company.
Maybe that's not the ethical approach to take, but you're going against consumer culture there.
They have the best search engine, the best map service, and a lot of the best many other things.
I don't hate them overall because they deliver some amazing products every now and then, but stuff like this certainly gets on my nerves.
Apple 'fanboys' don't refer to bugs as features. It's just the stereotype trolls who refer to bugs as features.
But 'apple fanboys do that -- will do', point to references or don't make a fool of yourself.