Google Toolbar Tracks Browsing Even After Users Choose "Disable" | Hacker News Reader

Google Toolbar Tracks Browsing Even After Users Choose "Disable"

benedelman.org

37 pointsindy8 comments

the article assumes that the x to close the toolbar is part of the toolbar itself.

it's not.

the x is a new feature of IE 8 and it is used to make IE not load the plugin responsible for drawing that toolbar.

So when you press the X, the toolbar isn't loaded next time you start IE, but isn't notified of this either.

The enhanced reporting features are part of the Google Toolbar BOH (browser helper object) which is not disabled when you click that X. The reason for that is the fact that IE as host of these plugins can't be 100% sure that the BOH and the toolbar are related.

Earlier versions of IE didn't have the X so there was just one way to turn the toolbar and/or reporting off: To use the methods provided by the toolbar itself (using the uninstaller or to disable the enhanced reporting using the toolbars official UI).

This current situation, IMHO, is just a consequence of the toolbar not being updated to the new situation (i.e. the x being drawn by IE).

Based on the technical knowledge I would not jump ahead and assume malice (on this part at least - the crappy taskbar button is another issue).

The irony behind this is the fact that IE added the x as a usability enhancement to deal with the growing amount of auto-installed toolbars and now they created a real mess due to not correctly track dependencies between different plugins.

The article alleges that even when the Google Toolbar Notifier BHO is also disabled, the tracking continues, and implies (though it doesn't quite state explicitly) that there is no way to disable whatever's doing the tracking other than a complete uninstallation.

Or restarting the browser, as recommended by Google. Even with some of IE's _native_ settings, it is required to restart the browser; I would not twice about restarting a browser, if I were so paranoid about Google "tracking" "sensitive" data -- I'd even use an incognito window.

Right---the core problem here is "can't disable"; there is a secondary problem of "it looks like I've disabled but I haven't", but nearly all the criticism in the article stands even if the X is none of Google's doing.

The word 'evil' does not appear at the target article, in either the headline or text -- so why prepend it to the submission headline? The article and author are more credible without the gratuitous editorial spin.

Apologies, have changed the submission title back to the original article's headline.

Disclosure: I serve as co-counsel in unrelated litigation against Google, Vulcan Golf et al. v. Google et al. I also serve as a consultant to various companies that compete with Google. But I write on my own -- not at the suggestion or request of any client, without approval or payment from any client.

I think the above says pretty much everything. If you're doing sensitive stuff, why even install third party plugins?

How long before we have a plug-in to report random page fetches to the toolbarqueries site? A la FF's Track Me Not.

(Edit: "random" meaning unrelated to the user's page fetches, as opposed to "a random sample of actual pages fetched").

Reply on news.ycombinator.com