or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google set to pay record $22.5M fine for violating Apple users' privacy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google set to pay record $22.5M fine for violating Apple users' privacy

post #1 of 64
Thread Starter 
Google is expected to pay a $22.5 million fine, the largest in the history of the Federal Trade Commission, for bypassing the privacy settings of users of Apple's Safari Web browser.

Google is "close" to the settlement terms, officials familiar with the deal told The Wall Street Journal. The FTC has charged Google of tricking the Safari browser into accepting an advertising "cookie" file that allowed the company to track people's online activities, even if the user had disabled such tracking.

"The FTC is focused on a 2009 help center page," Google said in a statement. "We have now changed that page and taken steps to remove the ad cookies."

The search company has said the tracking of Safari users was inadvertent, and no harm was caused to consumers. But the FTC still believes that Google violated a 20-year deal the two entities signed last October, in which Google agreed to not misrepresent its privacy practices to consumers.

The deal between Google and the FTC amounts to a $16,000 fine per violation, per day. Noting that the FTC is a "relatively small federal agency," the Journal said the anticipated $22.5 million fine will be the largest ever imposed by the commission on a single corporation.

The FTC previously charged Google with using deceptive tactics when it launched its "Buzz" social network. That led to Google signing the consent decree, in which the company agreed to enact a number of privacy protecting measures.



Word first surfaced this May that the FTC was set to fine Google "tens of millions" of dollars for bypassing Safari privacy settings.

Google's cookie strategy would exploit a loophole in Safari, allowing an advertiser to place a cookie if the user interacted with an ad. Some ads placed by DoubleClick, which Google owns, would automatically send an invisible form to make it appear the user was interacting with an advertisement, which prompted Safari to allow DoubleClick to install a temporary cookie on the user's computer.

Apple was also subpoenaed by the FTC in March of this year as part of an ongoing antitrust investigation by the commission against Google. The FTC said it is "examining whether the company unfairly increases advertising rates for competitors and ranks search results to favor its own businesses, such as its networking site Google+."
post #2 of 64
Serves the consumer right for clicking on a google product
;-)

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #3 of 64
Ouch!

I'm glad to see our governing bodies actually taking a measurable stance in defense of our privacy.

Hopefully this will send a clear message.
post #4 of 64

from the Wall Street Journal Online July 10th:

 

"While the fine likely will represent only a tiny portion of Google's revenues—last year, the Internet giant raked in that much cash roughly every five hours or so—it counts among a series of negative reports about Google's privacy practices that could undermine users' trust in its services."

post #5 of 64
The FTC should double the fine to $45 million for Google's lie that this is about a 2009 Help Page

It just never stops with these guys. Unbelievable

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply
post #6 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

The FTC should double the fine to $45 million for Google's lie that this is about a 2009 Help Page
It just never stops with these guys. Unbelievable

Actually I think it was about Google misstating their privacy policy as it applied to Safari settings. It doesn't mean that bypassing Safari settings was proper in the first place, but that's not what the FTC fined Google for afaik.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #7 of 64

Nothing surprises from Google Spyware Inc. 

post #8 of 64
How is this DOING NO EVIL, Google??
post #9 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Serves the consumer right for clicking on a google product
;-)

Hate to break it to you, but Google has a presence on nearly all of the most popular sites out there whether it's by way of ads, services, analytics, whatever. Good luck getting away from them completely.

post #10 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpnorton82 View Post

Ouch!
I'm glad to see our governing bodies actually taking a measurable stance in defense of our privacy.
Hopefully this will send a clear message.

Measurable stance? Larry Page probably pulled this out of his wallet and paid the courts in cash.

post #11 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Serves the consumer right for clicking on a google product
;-)

Apple's new partner Facebook also uses (used) the same bypass exploit to get around user settings.

http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/google-and-facebook-bypassing-safari-security-1064088

 

Google got fined for misrepresenting that if Safari users had the default setting "block all 3rd -party cookies" then Google's plug-in to block those cookies wasn't needed since Safai would already do that. It wasn't true, whether by design or intent. Personally I suspect intentionally misstated. But the fine was not for actually bypassing Safari user settings. I guess the FTC is OK with that and Facebook, assuming they never changed it, and others can continue on with the bypass exploit. 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #12 of 64
Wait... As an Apple user whose privacy was potentially violated, it's the government who reaps the reward of the 22 Mil? Where's my cut and the rest of Apple users cut?
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #13 of 64
Where is my cut??
post #14 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Wait... As an Apple user whose privacy was potentially violated, it's the government who reaps the reward of the 22 Mil? Where's my cut and the rest of Apple users cut?
/
/
/

 

 

The government is of the people.  The people received the money.  But now, given the finding of fact by the FTC, maybe a class action suit will be filed for any special damages that specific people suffered.

post #15 of 64

Whats the FCC charging facebook and the other 20+ companies that did the same thing?

post #16 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Wait... As an Apple user whose privacy was potentially violated, it's the government who reaps the reward of the 22 Mil? Where's my cut and the rest of Apple users cut?
/
/
/


Your cut is being used to pay the salaries of the Judges who are having to deal with the various Apple - Samsung disputes. ;-)

 

The fine isn't really big enough to bother Google but the damage to their image will be far greater and richly deserved.

post #17 of 64

But Google just wants everything to be open

 

google-is-watching.png

post #18 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple's new partner Facebook also uses (used) the same bypass exploit to get around user settings.

http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/google-and-facebook-bypassing-safari-security-1064088

 

Google got fined for misrepresenting that if Safari users had the default setting "block all 3rd -party cookies" then Google's plug-in to block those cookies wasn't needed since Safai would already do that. It wasn't true, whether by design or intent. Personally I suspect intentionally misstated. But the fine was not for actually bypassing Safari user settings. I guess the FTC is OK with that and Facebook, assuming they never changed it, and others can continue on with the bypass exploit. 

 

You should be fined for misrepresenting why they got fined. (And for making the argument that since someone else was doing it, that makes it ok. Oh, sure, you'll deny that's what you meant, but there is no other rational way to interpret that comment, other than that you got in a little Apple mudslinging at the same time.)

 

They got fined because they violated a consent decree, a legally binding agreement, where they promised not to violate users' privacy or lie about the fact that they were violating users' privacy. So, it's not just that Google was violating users' privacy with black hat ("evil") exploits, it's that they lied ("evil") about it, and broke a legally binding promise ("evil") not to violate users' privacy or lie about it. In other words, because they were deceitful & dishonest, and violated what is essentially a court order -- they lied, cheated and broke the law... again.

 

"Inadvertent." That's a funny choice of characterization of this particular privacy and consent decree violation. by Google. We all remember when they claimed the Street View data collection was "inadvertent", and then we found out that not only was it not, but that they lied to regulators about the extent of it and exactly what they collected.

 

Google has shown themselves, time and again, to be one of the most dishonest companies most of us have seen in our lifetimes. Lie, cheat, steal... do any evil. That pretty much sums them up. No respect for users, no respect for privacy, no respect for the law.

post #19 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

Hate to break it to you, but Google has a presence on nearly all of the most popular sites out there whether it's by way of ads, services, analytics, whatever. Good luck getting away from them completely.

I have found escaping Google's grasp to be quite easy.


Calendars, Contacts, Email:
iCloud

Search Engine:
Safari>Preferences>General>Default Search Engine

Do Not Track (OS X 10.7 Lion):
Safari>Preferences>Advanced>"Show Develop menu in menu bar"

Do Not Track (OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion):
Safari>Preferences>Privacy>"Website Tracking: Ask websites not to track me"

Install Safari extensions to block adware, options include:
Adblock
Cookie Stumbler
Do Not Track Plus
Ghostery

If still concerned a firewall may also be used, the following is recommended:
Little Snitch
post #20 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post

Whats the FCC charging facebook and the other 20+ companies that did the same thing?

Nothing as the fine wasn't for any privacy violations. As I said earlier, the FTC is apparently OK with working around user's Safari settings, at least not going after anyone for doing so. The fine was for Google's privacy page statement highlighted in the article.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #21 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Google has shown themselves, time and again, to be one of the most dishonest companies most of us have seen in our lifetimes. Lie, cheat, steal... do any evil. That pretty much sums them up. No respect for users, no respect for privacy, no respect for the law.

Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.



* Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
* Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
* Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
* Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
* Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)


While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.



* Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
* According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
* "San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
* Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
* Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3) This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
* Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
* Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
* Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
* Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
* Google has used their dominant position with Google Search to prefer Google+ search results and has published results that include personal data which doesn't provide an opt-out option. (6)

* Google employees have vandalized OpenStreetMap by adding erroneous data. (7)
* Google collected emails, texts, photos and documents gathered from Wi-Fi networks using Google's StreetView cars to collect data. (8)




1. Unattributed. No Published Date provided. Edited on 1 March 2012. Google - Policies & Principles - Privacy Policy. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
2. Steve Johnson. Posted March 17, 2012. Updated March 23, 2012. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20182226/android-apps-targeted-by-malware?source=rss_viewed. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
3. Unattributed. No Published Date provided. Ten things we know to be true. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
4. Adam L. Penenberg. October 10, 2006. Is Google Evil?. MotherJones. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
5. Unattributed. June 8, 2007. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/race-bottom-privacy-ranking-internet-service-companies. Privacy International. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
6. John Fontana. January 12, 2012 FTC asked to probe Google+, search integration. ZDNet. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
7. Lucian Parfeni. January 17, 2012. Google Accused of Vandalizing OpenStreetMap Data. Softpedia. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
8. Hack Doyle and Daniel Bates. Posted May 27, 2012. Sinister truth about Google spies: Street View cars stole information from British households but executives 'covered it up' for years. Daily Mail. Retrieved May 28, 2012.
Edited by MacBook Pro - 7/10/12 at 7:10am
post #22 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker View Post

Whats the FCC charging facebook and the other 20+ companies that did the same thing?

 

If any of those companies were operating under a consent decree, as a result of previously violating users' privacy, and lying about it, they'll be fined too.

 

Google is being fined because they are an egregious repeat offender who made a contract (a settlement) with the government not to repeat their offenses, and then did. When you are a serial law breaker, when you have a criminal record, you get punished more severely. Too bad the FTC doesn't have a 3-strikes policy.

post #23 of 64

I use Duckduckgo as my default search engine for over 90% of my search needs as a consequence of their admirable privacy policy.
 

post #24 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

You should be fined for misrepresenting why they got fined. (And for making the argument that since someone else was doing it, that makes it ok. Oh, sure, you'll deny that's what you meant, but there is no other rational way to interpret that comment, other than that you got in a little Apple mudslinging at the same time.)

They got fined because they violated a consent decree, a legally binding agreement, where they promised not to violate users' privacy or lie about the fact that they were violating users' privacy. So, it's not just that Google was violating users' privacy with black hat ("evil") exploits, it's that they lied ("evil") about it, and broke a legally binding promise ("evil") not to violate users' privacy or lie about it. In other words, because they were deceitful & dishonest, and violated what is essentially a court order -- they lied, cheated and broke the law... again.

"Inadvertent." That's a funny choice of characterization of this particular privacy and consent decree violation. by Google. We all remember when they claimed the Street View data collection was "inadvertent", and then we found out that not only was it not, but that they lied to regulators about the extent of it and exactly what they collected.

Google has shown themselves, time and again, to be one of the most dishonest companies most of us have seen in our lifetimes. Lie, cheat, steal... do any evil. That pretty much sums them up. No respect for users, no respect for privacy, no respect for the law.

Does it surprise you that GoogleGuy misrepresented the facts?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #25 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

I use Duckduckgo as my default search engine for over 90% of my search needs as a consequence of their admirable privacy policy.
 

 

The problem with Google is that it doesn't matter what their privacy policy says, or even that they promised to follow it, they'll still do whatever they want. Google's privacy policy isn't worth the bandwidth required to transmit it. (At least, back in the old days, you could have burned it to stay warm.)

 

Think about that. Google's privacy policy is empty rhetoric. Meaningless. A lie.

 

If they are lying about that, in the interests of maximizing profits, what else are they lying about? Are they padding the click-through numbers and overcharging advertisers? How else are they tracking users when they've promised they aren't? (And why should we think they aren't?) When a company shows that it will consistently say one thing and do another (Remember how they sold out net neutrality?) how can they be trusted at all, in anything they do. When a company consistently lies to cover up their wrong doing, how can you believe anything they say. Fundamentally dishonest. Repeated violations of the law. Their behavior is indefensible, reckless, and dangerous.

post #26 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Does it surprise you that GoogleGuy misrepresented the facts?

What did I misrepresent? It's an easy claim to make but some specifics would be nice.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #27 of 64
The fine needed to have been the sum total of the money they gleaned from this travesty, doubled. First to repay, second to fine.

When I have to use AdBlock, Ghostery, Do Not Track Plus, GoogleClickTracker, and Google Disconnect to stay relatively private on the Internet…

… and when I have to use Shellfish, Get Off My Lawn, Facebook Disconnect, and Twitter Disconnect to get rid of social networking…

… there's something wrong with the Internet.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #28 of 64

I guess you can cheer all you want. You'll never see one red cent of the fine :)  

post #29 of 64

"The search company has said the tracking of Safari users was inadvertent, and no harm was caused to consumers."

 

There is no way that this tracking code came about by accident. It was willful, it was deliberate. That is the complete opposite of inadvertent. And all consumers affected by it were harmed. Their privacy requests were ignored -that is harm right there.

 

Google has advanced our civilization on this one. Instead of the American tradition of no-apology apologies "we are sorry if anyone one was hurt", we have now arrived at the "We didn't do anything and nothing happened to you" tradition. All we need now is some bold company to start following that up with "So STFU".

 

 

post #30 of 64

But how could a company with such cute logos and vows of openness ever do any harm?

 

 

/sarcasm

post #31 of 64
They tried to outsmart Apple and break the law, they shouldn't be surprised by this decision.
post #32 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

Where is my cut??

Mmmmm that was my thought! LOL

It was us users that were screwed with after all. /smile
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #33 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetsetter883 View Post

But how could a company with such cute logos and vows of openness ever do any harm?


/sarcasm

Yep, about time the Google logo was Hannibal Lecter in a face mask eh? /grin
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #34 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

What did I misrepresent? It's an easy claim to make but some specifics would be nice.

He already provided them. Post #18.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #35 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Serves the consumer right for clicking on a google product
;-)

That is not what happened. It was exactly the opposite. Just landing on a page Google was using Javascript in the background to dynamically create a form and submit it which appeared to the browser as if the user had clicked on the submit button. The user had no idea what was going on because it was totally invisible.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #36 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

… there's something wrong with the Internet.

What was your first clue?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #37 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

Google has shown themselves, time and again, to be one of the most dishonest companies most of us have seen in our lifetimes. Lie, cheat, steal... do any evil. That pretty much sums them up. No respect for users, no respect for privacy, no respect for the law.

It makes one wonder how the organizational structure disseminates this evilness downward through the ranks or does it percolate upwards from the hackers in the basement.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #38 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

What was your first clue?

When THIS had to be put in writing instead of being common sense:
Quote:
DON’T BE EVIL

Don’t be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served—as shareholders and in all other ways—by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains. This is an important aspect of our culture and is broadly shared within the company.

Google users trust our systems to help them with important decisions: medical, financial and many others. Our search results are the best we know how to produce. They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them or for inclusion or more frequent updating. We also display advertising, which we work hard to make relevant, and we label it clearly. This is similar to a well-run newspaper, where the advertisements are clear and the articles are not influenced by the advertisers’ payments. We believe it is important for everyone to have access to the best information and research, not only to the information people pay for you to see.

The highlights are the best part.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #39 of 64

I know that you reference the WSJ in your article, but you're also obliged to attribute that graphic to them.

post #40 of 64

Too bad it wasn't $22.5B  That would really hurt their little ego and put this malpractice to rest. Identity theft all begins with Google!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google set to pay record $22.5M fine for violating Apple users' privacy