or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Google reportedly ignoring Safari users' privacy settings to better track its ads [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google reportedly ignoring Safari users' privacy settings to better track its ads [u] - Page 3

post #81 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

FWIW Google's Chrome browser does offer an "Incognito" mode, which means "pages that you open and files that you download while in incognito mode arent recorded in Chromes browsing or download history. We also make sure all new cookies are deleted when you close your incognito windows."

Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.

Just because Chrome or any other browser does not display your footprints does not mean that Google are not tracking your movements and recording them on their servers.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #82 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I suppose you're going to tell us next that the Safari extension that Google made to let us opt-out of Google Analytics actually opts us out of Google Analytics, then.

I have no idea. Where's the Safari extension and what does it say?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #83 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Just because Chrome or any other browser does not display your footprints does not mean that Google are not tracking your movements and recording them on their servers.

Nor does it mean that Apple doesn't either, so I'm not sure what the exact point is. Apple claims that once you opt-out the collected data isn't personally identifiable, but then goes on to say that in a way it is since the the IP address may be recorded anyway.

"As is true of most websites, we gather some information automatically and store it in log files. This information includes Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, browser type and language, Internet service provider (ISP), referring and exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp, and clickstream data.

We use this information to understand and analyze trends, to administer the site, to learn about user behavior on the site, and to gather demographic information about our user base as a whole. Apple may use this information in our marketing and advertising services.

In some of our email messages, we use a click-through URL linked to content on the Apple website. When customers click one of these URLs, they pass through a separate web server before arriving at the destination page on our website. We track this click-through data to help us determine interest in particular topics and measure the effectiveness of our customer communications. If you prefer not to be tracked in this way, you should not click text or graphic links in the email messages."
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #84 of 107
FWIW, both Apple and Google's use of cookies and their claims about them are very, very similar.

"Apple’s website, online services, interactive applications, email messages, and advertisements may use “cookies” and other technologies such as pixel tags and web beacons. These technologies help us better understand user behavior, tell us which parts of our website people have visited, and facilitate and measure the effectiveness of advertisements and web searches."

Hmmm.. What's a web beacon? Pixel Tag? Does turning off "cookies" disable those as well. I don't know.

"If you want to disable cookies and you’re using the Safari web browser, go to Safari preferences and then to the Security pane to disable cookies. On your Apple mobile device, go to Settings, then Safari, and then to the Cookies section. For other browsers, check with your provider to find out how to disable cookies. Please note that certain features of the Apple website will not be available once cookies are disabled. "

. . . and just like Google states about their privacy settings and cookies, Apple says in their docs "If you opt out, you will continue to receive the same number of mobile ads, but they may be less relevant because they will not be based on your interests. You may still see ads related to the content on a web page or in an application or based on other non-personal information. This opt-out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect interest-based advertising from other advertising networks."

Repeating what I said earlier, ignoring a user's active choice of whether to receive targeted advertising or not isn't acceptable to me. Period. With that said, Apple and Google's privacy policies are nearly identical. In reality Google offers more options for a user to control how their information is used and/or collected. Where do you find what information Apple has collected on you as a user?

What is the difference that stands out to you between what Apple claims they collect, and what your privacy rights are, and what Google claims?

I'm honestly curious and encourage some of the more active users to post the major differences between Apple's stated data collection policies, how they view user's privacy, and how collected personal and/or non-identifiable (!) information is shared with 3rd parties or otherwise used as compared to Google's privacy policies.

Google should be rightfully embarrassed by this little event. I don't see it as any big deal tho, mostly much ado about nothing.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #85 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

We might all hate it, but unsolicited advertising is not illegal.

While this is true it doesn't make coding to go against user settings to shove unwanted ads on someone any less tacky. or any less worthy of being called out on.

It is interesting that Google did this, claims they did nothing wrong and yet stopped. It's almost like they know they did something wrong (even though legal), got caught and stopped before they were stopped by a law suit etc. All in the hopes that this will disappear from the media in a few days where a law suit would not

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #86 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthropic View Post

Besides, this site makes its money from Google adds, I'd think it's selfish to use the site and try to block Google's cookies, you should do you best to support the site by helping Google continue to pay for its existence!

Competition is awesome, if Google wasn't around Apple would stop innovating and release new features even slower cause as we all know Microsoft stopped innovating a decade ago when it had no competition, there's no reason to think Apple wouldn't do the same. We need Google and even... *gulp*... Micro$oft, in order to help Apple be all it can be!

Is this a joke? I hope so.
post #87 of 107
Actually, the most disgusting thing about the story is Vibrant Media's reaction/defense:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Vibrant Media, another web advertiser using similar tactics to Google's, called the circumvention a "workaround" intended to "make Safari work like all the other browsers," because other major browsers, including Google's own Chrome and the almost exclusively Google-financed Mozilla Firefox, do not block third party cookie tracking by default.

So you're allowed to circumvent my privacy settings because some people don't know they have third-party cookies turned off? How many people really want third-party cookies turned on? You need to be put out of business - I hope somebody sues your pants off.

As for Google, they just don't care. They know it's a PR problem, so they out and out lie to try to make it go away.
post #88 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

What is the difference that stands out to you between what Apple claims they collect, and what your privacy rights are, and what Google claims?

I'm honestly curious and encourage some of the more active users to post the major differences between Apple's stated data collection policies, how they view user's privacy, and how collected personal and/or non-identifiable (!) information is shared with 3rd parties or otherwise used as compared to Google's privacy policies.

Anyone?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #89 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Anyone?

The difference should be obvious. You're saying that by opting out of one thing with Google that is somehow opts you out of all things that Google monitors when that clearly isn't the case. The anonymous data sent to Apple is for a very specific thing, it does not say that Apple doesn't track what items are more popular on their site and so forth. Apples and oranges comparison.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #90 of 107
How about this story?

"Facebook's "best practices" guide for its developers lists "cross-domain cookies do not work in Safari" as a common problem and recommends using the same kind of workaround Google employed."

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/17/tech...ce=yahoo_quote

Not that it's a big surprise, but there could be many many companies using this hack. It seems they don't even think it's wrong to purposely circumvent another company's software settings. A pox on all of them!
post #91 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Anyone?

Apple tracks you when you visit Apple sites -- to gather analytics to refine their site and improve the user experience.

Google tracks you when you visit any site then tries to influence what you see, do or buy based on who pays them the most money.

Example: Google can/does track you visiting porn sites and could use that info against you.

Typical users may not be aware of this and think they are getting the "best" or "only" choices -- when in reality they are getting the choices that are best for Google.

Knowledgeable users realize what is going on, may try to block it, ignore it, or just recognize it for what it is...

...An irritating, necessary [do no] evil cost of using anything Google.


I've been using and doing business with Apple for 34 years -- anyone at Apple that pulls this kind of crap gets fired... period!

At Google they revel (wallow) in this kind of crap -- and only [sometimes] "apologize" when caught.


I will not do business with someone I do not trust!

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #92 of 107
so...

Google PURPOSELY invaded my privacy in order to make more money off of spying on me. and they had to code an exploit to Apple's Safari loophole to do it...

Even after I specifically enabled a setting that was basically a strong request that they DON'T track me.

Yeah... I would make a statement after getting busted for that too. and then totally make moves to stop that practice, which totally contradicts the public statement I just made...

Google: evil. Period.

Don't believe me? Just watch Stephen Colbert interview Eric Schmidt on privacy. Then watch Eric dodge and sweat.

No wonder Obama had that dinner with google, Apple, Facebook, etc...
post #93 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The difference should be obvious. You're saying that by opting out of one thing with Google that is somehow opts you out of all things that Google monitors when that clearly isn't the case. The anonymous data sent to Apple is for a very specific thing, it does not say that Apple doesn't track what items are more popular on their site and so forth. Apples and oranges comparison.

So point me to the sections that shows Apple's stated policies differ from Google's, and then how they're better at protecting your privacy. Should be simple enough since the difference is obvious.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #94 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Apple tracks you when you visit Apple sites -- to gather analytics to refine their site and improve the user experience.

Only for that purpose Dick? Hardly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Example: Google can/does track you visiting porn sites and could use that info against you.

Really, you're positive about that? You might want to supply a link if you're stating it for a fact just to assure the readers that it's . . . well, a fact.

Here's what you apparently don't know.
Sites with Google ads may not include or link to:

Pornography, adult or mature content
Violent content
Content related to racial intolerance or advocacy against any individual, group or organisation
Excessive profanity
Hacking/cracking content
Gambling or casino-related content
Illicit drugs and drug paraphernalia content
Sales of beer or hard alcohol
Sales of tobacco or tobacco-related products
Sales of prescription drugs
Sales of weapons or ammunition (e.g. firearms, firearm components, fighting knives, stun guns)
Sales of products that are replicas or imitations of designer or other goods
Sales or distribution of coursework or student essays
Content regarding programs which compensate users for clicking ads or offers, performing searches, surfing websites or reading emails
Any other content that is illegal, promotes illegal activity or infringes on the legal rights of others.

http://support.google.com/adsense/bi...n&answer=48182


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Knowledgeable users realize what is going on

Which is a great reason for everyone to spend a little more time becoming knowledgeable. A little reseach and double checking before making claims that are any more than opinion would help assure that members here "realize what's really going on". No one does the others here any favors by repeating innuendo as truth and rumor as fact.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

What is the difference that stands out to you between what Apple claims they collect, and what your privacy rights are, and what Google claims?

I'm honestly curious and encourage some of the more active users to post the major differences between Apple's stated data collection policies, how they view user's privacy, and how collected personal and/or non-identifiable (!) information is shared with 3rd parties or otherwise used as compared to Google's privacy policies.

And I'm still waiting. The only responses so far amount to "it's obvious", "Google:evil" and "I've been using and doing business with Apple for 34 years".

FWIW Dick, I look at you and Solipsism as two of the most generally knowledgeable members here. You can do better at supporting your views. I've seen you both do so over and over, supported by facts and good research. You wouldn't accept response's so vague that tiptoe around the question if one of you had posed it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #95 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Only for that purpose Dick? Hardly.


Really, you're positive about that? You might want to supply a link if you're stating it for a fact just to assure the readers that it's . . . well, a fact.

Here's what you apparently don't know.
Sites with Google ads may not include or link to:

Pornography, adult or mature content
Violent content
Content related to racial intolerance or advocacy against any individual, group or organisation
Excessive profanity
Hacking/cracking content
Gambling or casino-related content
Illicit drugs and drug paraphernalia content
Sales of beer or hard alcohol
Sales of tobacco or tobacco-related products
Sales of prescription drugs
Sales of weapons or ammunition (e.g. firearms, firearm components, fighting knives, stun guns)
Sales of products that are replicas or imitations of designer or other goods
Sales or distribution of coursework or student essays
Content regarding programs which compensate users for clicking ads or offers, performing searches, surfing websites or reading emails
Any other content that is illegal, promotes illegal activity or infringes on the legal rights of others.

http://support.google.com/adsense/bi...n&answer=48182



Which is a great reason for everyone to spend a little more time becoming knowledgeable. A little reseach and double checking before making claims that are any more than opinion would help assure that members here "realize what's really going on". No one does the others here any favors by repeating innuendo as truth and rumor as fact.




And I'm still waiting. The only responses so far amount to "it's obvious", "Google:evil" and "I've been using and doing business with Apple for 34 years".


The problem is that you believe what Google say and ignore what they do.

Just as MS has violated my trust, so has google -- therefore I will not do business with them.

In 34 years, Apple, has not purposely violated my trust -- I am proud to do business with them.

You can believe whatever you wish and do whatever you wish...

..but please don't waste my time trying to equate Google's intentional unsavory (if not illegal) actions with Apple's proven excellent behavior.


I suspect that most here will not bother responding to your posts as they are so outlandish -- nobody could be that naive!


As it is, I am considering putting you on my ignore list -- as I see no benefit to your frequent posts...

This will be my first use of the AI ignore feature!

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #96 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

The problem is that you believe what Google say and ignore what they do.

Just as MS has violated my trust, so has google -- therefore I will not do business with them.

In 34 years, Apple, has not purposely violated my trust -- I am proud to do business with them.

You can believe whatever you wish and do whatever you wish...

..but please don't waste my time trying to equate Google's intentional unsavory (if not illegal) actions with Apple's proven excellent behavior.


I suspect that most here will not bother responding to your posts as they are so outlandish -- nobody could be that naive!


As it is, I am considering putting you on my ignore list -- as I see no benefit to your frequent posts...

This will be my first use of the AI ignore feature!


Ignoring the question and the questioner would be an excellent way to avoid crafting an answer based on facts and sources.

I'm sorry you're unable to support your views with anything more than with a gut feeling, so you're probably right: There's no need for you to bother responding without something better.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #97 of 107
Ahhh... that's much better....
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #98 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Ahhh... that's much better....

Who'da thunk? Two things in two days that we could probably agree on.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #99 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

So point me to the sections that shows Apple's stated policies differ from Google's, and then how they're better at protecting your privacy. Should be simple enough since the difference is obvious.

They don't, though Apple has a history of being much more transparent and exacting with their customers than Google. But that's not the point, refer to my original comment to you that mentioned private browsing only kept the local browser from recording your history, not anything else. There was statement about Apple v. Google or Safari v. Chrome. It was local v. remote chronicling.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #100 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

They don't, though Apple has a history of being much more transparent and exacting with their customers than Google.

How so?

Does Apple have a page where you can see what they've gathered on you? How about a method for controlling what types of ads get delivered in the first place? Has Apple proposed one unified Privacy Policy covering all Apple services and offerings? Why is the separate iAds opt-out necessary?

In what way is Apple being more transparent than Google.

BTW Solipsism, thanks for a more honest answer than Dick was willing to give.

To be clear, I'm not advocating for Google, nor implying that if Google is wrong (or right) then so is Apple. Apple is a great company, a proven market force. Everyone should also note they're much more in agreement with Google on their privacy statements, and both advocate the same general approach in protecting their user's personally identifiable information.

More to the point I'm trying to cut thru the piles of FUD and encourage the other members and casual visitors to look for themselves at the two privacy policies. Read how they're intended to safeguard your privacy and under what circumstances they'll share what they know with outside 3rd parties. Don't be so quick to accept "Google spys on me but Apple doesn't" or "Google sells my private information to the highest bidder, but Apple protects me". Don't believe what I write, nor what anyone else would want you to believe without looking at it yourself.

Take the time to try and prove my posts on this to be wrong. It will be worth it if you really want to "know what's going on". (BTW, this isn't directed at you Soli. You already know the story.) The two privacy policies are easy to find and compare, as are the opt-out pages and procedures for both.

If Google and Apple were still partnering against the evil Microsoft I suspect the tone of posts would change significantly. Understand why rumors and half-truths might be thrown into Google discussions. It's more about Apple and less about "evil Google" IMHO.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #101 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

1. Google has demonstrated themselves to be so dishonest and deceptive, time after time, that there is, rightfully, a presumption that they are lying. With no credibility, because they have no history of honesty or straight dealing, It's up to them to offer proof that they are telling the truth.

This is the essence of the matter, in my opinion. Arguing that Google really does protect people's privacy, by citing their published privacy policy, is therefore a "begging the question" logical fallacy.
post #102 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

This is the essence of the matter, in my opinion. Arguing that Google really does protect people's privacy, by citing their published privacy policy, is therefore a "begging the question" logical fallacy.

Concise and very well said!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #103 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

This is the essence of the matter, in my opinion. Arguing that Google really does protect people's privacy, by citing their published privacy policy, is therefore a "begging the question" logical fallacy.

Since Google's methods and procedures for protecting user's privacy and adhering to their published policy is monitored by an independent outside auditor in conjunction with rules set up by order of the US Government I find it highly unlikely they're lying. I assume you weren't aware of that.

Have you read both companies stated policies and if so what do you see as the big difference between them, if there is any?

Do both companies offer a way to see what information is gathered on you? Do both offer a way to request personal information be removed? Do both offer a way to modify and control the data associated with you? Do both companies even offer any way to control, limit and customize the types of advertising directed to you?

Find the answers to those questions, then decide which one is more honest and upfront about your privacy and offers more options to control it. (and an outside independent audit to prove they're doing what they say).

Or just continue to hold fast to the FUD approach. "Everyone knows" so no proof needed, right?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #104 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthropic View Post

I don't think either the Apple contacts security failure or the Google cookie permission failures deserve the level of venom people spit at them. All corporations make bad decisions, they get told about them and fix the issue and try harder to avoid it, but it will always happen. I still think it is former Micro$oft employees penetrating both Apple and Google

You can't put these two issues on the same plane.
  • Apple, in essence, forgot to ask for the users permission (a la Location/Notifications) to access their address book data. Remember, Apple doesn't benefit financially in anyway from the address book access.
  • Google, DELIBERATELY, went out of their way to circumvent privacy provisions put in place to prevent unwanted tracking so that they could benefit from that action financially.
post #105 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Not that it's a big surprise, but there could be many many companies using this hack. It seems they don't even think it's wrong to purposely circumvent another company's software settings. A pox on all of them!

Distilling it down to such a clinical response as you have makes a lot easier to accept and more difficult to see what's actually wrong.

However when you replace "purposefuly circumvent another company's software settings" with "deliberately disregarding the end-user's express permission to not be trackable" it takes a much more sinister turn.

If you really think that only deserves a little tiny mark against their name, that goes to show accepting people have become of this sort of dispicable action by a company.
post #106 of 107
So, is there anyone on this forum who doesn't think Gatorguy is a Google shill at this point?

Yes, I know it's his most fallacy-ridden, flawed-premise argument yet, but the desperation with which he defends his master is impressive, although wasted. I particularly laughed at the part where he says, "'... I'm trying to cut thru [sic] the piles of FUD..." The only piles of FUD in this thread are GG's post.

Here's his basic argument:

1. Apple's and Google's privacy policies have some similar wording.
2. This means that Apple is tracking you just as much as Google. ("...look for [yourselves] at the two privacy policies," he writes.)
3. You believe Apple isn't evil.
4. Google is just like Apple, really
5. Google is really good, even better than Apple, because they are subject to government mandated audits.

Frankly, it's a little embarrassing watching GG make such a fool of himself with such a desperate and pathetic argument. But, the above is essentially his argument, so lets look at it point by point.

1, As pointed out by others, Apple's privacy policy referred to applies to Apple's web site, Google's "privacy policy" refers to... well, pretty much everything you do on the web. Not really the same thing, is it? Seriously, GG, is that the best you have? Yes, that is the best he has, nothing. To equate "tracking" of what a user does on a single web site with what Google does on millions and millions of Web sites is the stupidest argument we've seen on these forums in quite a while.

2. The idea that Apple (or any company) is tracking you as much as Google is really just totally absurd. It's patently false. What else needs to be said.

3. OK, well, yes, most of us, with good reason, don't think Apple is evil.

4. Well, no, since the first two points are ridiculously absurd, they don't add up to the fourth.

5. All the government mandated audit is meant to insure is that Google isn't violating it's published privacy policy. It's a government mandated audit because Google was found to be violating it's own privacy policy. In other words, they really can't be trusted because they have a history of saying one thing and doing another. Their privacy policy is so vaguely worded that it isn't hard for them to beat the audit and essentially continue to do whatever they want.

If Google is willing to hack your browser opt-out settings to track you against your will, does anyone really believe they would honor any other opt-out? Does anyone really believe they will stop at anything in their insatiable desire for personal information. A company that has time after time said one thing and done another, and broken the law multiple times.

There are piles of FUD here, but all of it from GG. Not surprising since Google is paying him to disseminate it. But, especially in this case, his argument is so ridiculous it's laughable.

EDIT: And this "rogue code/programmer/contractor" defense by Google is wearing more than a little thin. How many times have we heard it now. Everytime Google gets caught breaking the law or trampling on people's privacy, or doing something unethical, it's always "inadvertent", an employee out of control, and so on. The number of times we've heard this excuse, it would seem that most of their employees just do whatever they want whenever they want however they want. No one is apparently in charge of anything. At this point, all of these denials of responsibility and knowledge just don't hold water. Google knew it's developers were developing exploits to allow them to track users who turned off 3rd party cookies in Safari. It's almost certain they are doing similar things to get around anti-tracking technology elsewhere. No one should believe that this was anything but a conscious, deliberate decision on the part of Google to go Black Hat on this, and no one should believe they haven't done it before nor that they won't do it again... any chance they get.
post #107 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

If you only count on the ethics of others to protect your property you'll be in for a shocker. I lock my car and expect the law enforcement in my area to offer enough service to discourage potential theft.

1. I have a promise from Google that they won't steal my car.

2. Just to be on the safe side, BMW provides me with door locks.

3. Google discovers that the windows are made of glass, allowing them to get past the locks.

4. You say it's BMW's fault that Google stole my car because the glass is a "vulnerability."

5. I think that's flawed logic and strongly disagree.

.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Google reportedly ignoring Safari users' privacy settings to better track its ads [u]