WSJ: Safari Loophole Allowed Google to Track Users via Ads

Status
Not open for further replies.

warezme

Distinguished
Dec 18, 2006
426
0
18,940
3
I hope the FTC slams all those mutha's. I'm tired of their lying sneaky ways they keep trying to steal your information or force feed you ads. If your org can't sustain itself without lying and cheating then maybe it wasn't meant to be. Just go out of business. The web was built to share information and not advertisements that track and steal.
 

freggo

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2008
778
0
18,930
0
"but was unaware that it inadvertently enabled the advertising cookies"

Yeah, right. Because Google employs 2nd tier programmers.
Gimme a break. You got caught with your fingers in the cookie jar (pun intended).

It seems that slowly but persistently Google is sliding down the slope of misconduct like every other corporation that grew too big to be held accountable.

Shame, but certainly no surprise.
 

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
542
0
18,940
2
I find it sad that Google "gets in hot water" for a flaw in Apple's software. Then has to go back and fix their +1/ad sense programs, but still gets called out for being the bad guy.

They should have said "we have reported this flaw to apple to be fixed in a future security update" and passed the buck to where it should have been.
 

molo9000

Distinguished
Aug 14, 2010
243
0
18,830
0
[citation][nom]amk-aka-Phantom[/nom]Safari has security settings?[/citation]

Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Internet Explorer all accept 3rd party cookies by default.
Only Safari blocks them by default.

btw: it should be called privacy settings, not security settings.
 

glasssplinter

Distinguished
Feb 22, 2006
54
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]rantoc[/nom]But but Apple products are impervious and patched quickly if anything is found... *trying to hold laughter*[/citation]

"Well, just a second there, professor. We, uh, we fixed the *glitch*. So he won't be receiving a paycheck anymore, so it'll just work itself out naturally." crapple philosophy 101
 

ap3x

Distinguished
May 17, 2009
348
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]dalethepcman[/nom]I find it sad that Google "gets in hot water" for a flaw in Apple's software. Then has to go back and fix their +1/ad sense programs, but still gets called out for being the bad guy.They should have said "we have reported this flaw to apple to be fixed in a future security update" and passed the buck to where it should have been.[/citation]

Google did not find it, and it is not a security problem. It is a privacy issue which Google used for the benefit to Google to get around measures in Safari to block the use of 3rd party cookies. All the other browsers have it enabled by default, Safari does not so Google decided to us a method to get around that.

So no this is not a case where someone finds a vulnerability and gets in trouble for it. This is a case where a large company leverages a flaw to gleen additional information from a device without explicit permission from the user.

It is the same thing as someone using a exploit in a browser to install Gator or something on your computer. No one wanted that crap on their machine but somehow it ended up getting installed and showing up next to your clock. Anyone remember Gator?
 

greenspoon

Distinguished
Nov 28, 2007
26
0
18,580
0
Come on guys. Google was doing this for the good of its users. That is all. They were not out to make money, invade privacy, or anything else. They just wanted to provide a better experience for there users.

Apple on the other hand. This was a deliberate mistake on their part and everyone at Apple should be hung until dead for the oversight.
 

ap3x

Distinguished
May 17, 2009
348
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]greenspoon[/nom]Come on guys. Google was doing this for the good of its users. That is all. They were not out to make money, invade privacy, or anything else. They just wanted to provide a better experience for there users.Apple on the other hand. This was a deliberate mistake on their part and everyone at Apple should be hung until dead for the oversight.[/citation]

lol, are you serious? For the good of it's users on IOS devices? Am I the only one that finds it interesting that your so understanding for Google and then you go to the extreme when talking about Apple. I mean come on "hung until dead"? seriously?
 

greenspoon

Distinguished
Nov 28, 2007
26
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]ap3x[/nom]lol, are you serious? For the good of it's users on IOS devices? Am I the only one that finds it interesting that your so understanding for Google and then you go to the extreme when talking about Apple. I mean come on "hung until dead"? seriously?[/citation]

Ummm.... It is called sarcasm.
 

alidan

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
1,681
0
19,730
0
[citation][nom]warezme[/nom]I hope the FTC slams all those mutha's. I'm tired of their lying sneaky ways they keep trying to steal your information or force feed you ads. If your org can't sustain itself without lying and cheating then maybe it wasn't meant to be. Just go out of business. The web was built to share information and not advertisements that track and steal.[/citation]

if those ads are what keep youtube free, my email free and with more than 10mb of storage space, and help allot of websites and video makers make money through allowing their ads, in large enough sums that popular places can make it a full time job... well i am PERFECTLY FINE with being shown ads.

i WILL NEVER see why people have such a huge problem with ads.

 

ap3x

Distinguished
May 17, 2009
348
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]greenspoon[/nom]Ummm.... It is called sarcasm.[/citation]


Ahh, my apologies. Guess I am used to seeing all kinds of really extreme comments on this site so it is hard to tell when someone is being sarcastic.
 

popatim

Splendid
Moderator
It said in a statement to Electronista that users who had opted out of its interest-based ad program (via Google's Ad Preferences Manager) were not affected by the work around.
This proves that it was intention; why else would you code the workaround to not work on users that opted out...

Not everyone is a moron Google. You're cold busted. Enjoy the lawsuits and fines.
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
582
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]cookoy[/nom]Curiously IE, FF and Chrome are not affected. Only safari. Is this poor programming or something more sinister?[/citation]
IE, Firefox and Chrome aren't affected because they accept third party cookies by default while Safari doesn't
 

del35

Distinguished
May 22, 2009
495
0
18,930
0
I find it sad that Google "gets in hot water" for a flaw in Apple's software.
You comment points light at how the MSM list of favored companies is rigged these days. Imagine Microsoft getting off that easily.

 

freggo

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2008
778
0
18,930
0
Talk about THG not even trying to filter the spam ads out.
It's not that hard to do after all; especially for a top tech site.
Shame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
B Streaming Video & TVs 3
W Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 5
Z Streaming Video & TVs 24
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 9
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 16
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 23
G Streaming Video & TVs 14
G Streaming Video & TVs 6
G Streaming Video & TVs 25
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 40
G Streaming Video & TVs 21
G Streaming Video & TVs 28
G Streaming Video & TVs 6
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 4
G Streaming Video & TVs 5
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 14

ASK THE COMMUNITY