- It's only a proposal
- It only applies to domains in what they call the Masked Domain List (MDL), see [1]
- The masked IP will be in the same country and same "coarse location" as your actual IP
- It applies "when users are signed into their Google account in the Chrome browser before starting an Incognito session."
1. https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection?tab=readme-ov-...
>IP Protection will use client authentication to limit the ability of bad actors to leverage the proxies to amplify attacks on services on the Masked Domain List. Therefore, IP Protection will only be available to users that have been authenticated using the Google account they're signed in with in the Chrome browser prior to opening a new Incognito window.
However they say that Apple can’t see the final destination of your traffic.
Most privacy changes have the effect of advantaging the position of big tech. To some extent this is unavoidable because users will actively consent to share data with Google etc but not AdTech startups.
For example, Apple’s ATT rules for app tracking made their own App Store search ads more competitive to Facebook. And the removal of third party cookies benefits Google’s banner ad business over rivals.
there's no ethical way for Google to provide this service, they just shouldn't.
It's so transparent and ludicrous, at first I thought it was an Onion or April Fools post.
Sounds like this is just another attempt by Google to gather the data for itself but make it harder for other advertisement companies.
If you're already signed into google then they already have your IP. If you're not signed into google they continue to not get your IP or proxied traffic. What's the issue?
>But other advert platforms don't get your IP
No good deed goes unpunished. Google gets flak for making chrome privacy better, but they also get flak for making chrome privacy worse (see comments about fingerprinting in this thread).