Critics say the new Google rules make profit on privacy

Privacy campaigners have called Google’s new rules “a clear disregard for user privacy” when people track people online.

The changes on Sunday allow the so -called “fingerprinting”, which allows online advertisers to collect more data about users, including their IP addresses and information about their equipment.

Google says that this data is already widely used by other companies, and it encourages responsible data use.

Although the company was previously strongly revealed against such data collection, saying that In a 2019 blog He fingerprinting “affects the user’s choice and is incorrect.”

But in Post Announcing a change in the new rule, Google said that the way people used the Internet – such as a device like smart TV and console – means to target advertisements to users using traditional data collections. It was difficult, which the users control with the cookie consent.

It also states that more privacy options provide protection to users.

Google said in a statement to the BBC: “Confidential-and-confidential technologies provide new ways to our partners to succeed on emerging platforms … User without compromising on privacy.”

But opponents of change say that fingerprinting and IP address collection is a setback for privacy because it is difficult for users to control what data is collected about them.

“By allowing fingerprinting, Google has given itself – and dominates the advertising industry – allowing using a form of tracking that people can’t do much to stop,” Martin Thomson said, Martin Thomson said, Google’s rival Mosila’s prestigious engineer Martin Thomson said.

Fingerprinting collects information about a person’s device and browser and puts it together to make that person’s profile.

Information to advertise people is not clearly collected, but it can be used to target specific advertisements based on that user’s data.

For example, a person’s screen size or language settings are legally required to display a website properly.

But when it is combined with their time region, browser type, battery level – and many other data points – it can create a unique combination of settings that makes it easier to work for using a web service.

These details along with someone’s IP address – the unique identifier used by internet devices – was previously prohibited by Google for advertising targeting.

Privacy campaigners say that unlike cookies, which are small files stored on a local device, users have very little control over whether they send fingerprint information to advertisers.

“Electronic Frontier Foundation Staff Technologist Leena Cohen said,” Apparently by allowing a tracking technique that he had earlier described as incompatible with user control, Google has highlighted his priority of profits on privacy. ”

He said, “The same tracking techniques that Google claim that online advertisements are essential, also highlight the sensitive information of individuals for data brokers, monitoring companies and law enforcement,” he said.

“My argument will be that the fingerprinting sits slightly in a gray field,” Pit Wallace says to Gumgam, the advertising technology company.

“Should people feel comfortable living in a gray field of privacy? I would say no,” they say.

Gamgum, which has previously worked with the BBC on advertising campaigns, depends on something called relevant advertisement, which uses other data points to target advertisements for online users, such as keywords on the website they have their personal Instead of data.

Shri Walis says that fingerprinting permission represents a change in the industry.

“Fingerprinting feels that it is taking a much more business-focused approach to the use of consumer data rather than a consumer-centric approach,” they say.

“Such flip-flopping, in my opinion, is harmful to that route that the industry was actually leading to this idea of ​​keeping consumer privacy at the forefront.”

He says he hopes that advertising tech companies conclude that “this is not a proper way to use consumer data,” but expects to see fingerprinting as an alternative to better target advertisements. .

The advertisement is the life of the Internet business model, and allows many websites to be available freely to users, without paying them to reach directly.

But in turn, users often have to leave personal information about themselves so that advertisers can show them relevant advertisements.

UK data watchdog, Information Commissioner Office (ICO), says that “fingerprinting is not a proper means to track users online because it is to control people’s choice and how to collect their information. is likely to.”

One in blog post In December, ICO’s Regulatory Risk Executive Director Stephen Almond wrote: “We think this change is irresponsible.”

He said that advertisers and businesses who decide to use this technology will have to demonstrate how they are living within data and privacy laws in the UK.

“Based on our understanding of how the fingerprinting techniques are used for the current advertisement, there is a high bar to meet,” he wrote.

Google said in a statement: “We look forward to further discussion with ICO about this policy change.

“We know that data signals such as IP addresses are already used by others in the industry today, and Google is using IP to fight fraud over the years.”

A spokesperson said: “We continue to give options to users whether to get individual advertisements, and will work in the entire industry to encourage the responsible data use.”