FLoC Google!

Harvey

https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/16/22387492/google-floc-ad-tech-privacy-browsers-brave-vivaldi-edge-mozilla-chrome-safari

We’ve reached out to Opera for comment as well, and here’s that company’s statement:

As you probably know, Opera has a long history of introducing privacy features that benefit our users: it was the first major browser to introduce built-in ad blocking, browser VPN and other privacy-centric features. The significance now is the end of third party cookies, which will reduce the amount of cross-website tracking on the web. While we and other browsers are discussing new and better privacy-preserving advertising alternatives to cookies including FloC, we have no current plans to enable features like this in the Opera browsers in their current form. Generally speaking, we do, however, think it’s too early to say in which direction the market will move or what the major browsers will do.

brent

Harvey Last sentence says it all.

WetGeek

Solarmass I wonder why did you decide to install this browser?

Its speed-dial feature was wonderful, and the ad-blocking feature, as well as built-in VPN were attractive. Of course, I always disabled third-party cookies immediately after I installed it on a machine, and I used DuckDuckGo exclusively for searches. And that was long before China was involved in their ownership.

That statement from Opera that @Harvey found for us didn't exactly fill me with warm fuzzies. I'd have been a lot happier if they'd unequivocally denounced FLoC instead of a bunch of lawyer-speak that doesn't really tell whether they're for it or again' it. Just haven't decided yet.

Since I've changed to Vivaldi as the default for that purpose, I'll go ahead and remove Opera from everything now, based on the fact that I simply don't need it for anything anymore.

Solarmass

WetGeek and the ad-blocking feature

You can just install an awesome uBlock Origin extension...

WetGeek

Solarmass You can just install an awesome uBlock Origin extension...

Yeah, I've done that with all browsers I've used that aren't Opera. I like it.

brent

DDG at DDG page says "DuckDuckGo Search (via our website duckduckgo.com) is now also configured to opt-out of FLoC, regardless if you use our extension or app." (So when was it opted in?)...

Both EFF and DDG say Floc is a Chrome-Only thang. As you noted, @WetGeek, chrome descendants (forks?) can refuse to participate (disable the internals) afaik, I guess.

[Here's my sources, I've taken nothing out of context: https://spreadprivacy.com/block-floc-with-duckduckgo/ and https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/google-testing-its-controversial-new-ad-targeting-tech-millions-browsers-heres]

"That means all the trackers who currently monitor your behavior across a fraction of the web using cookies will now receive your FLoC cohort ID as well. The cohort ID is a direct reflection of your behavior across the web. This could supplement the behavioral profiles that many trackers already maintain."(---a particularly romantic passage🙂)

3 sources in this thread all confirm this: if you don't use chrome proper and don't use google then you have no worries.
I'm skeptical.
At the end of the day it's a weird program and Alphabet has been transparent (https://github.com/google/ads-privacy/blob/master/proposals/FLoC/FLOC-Whitepaper-Google.pdf) as of late.
Honestly seems like a trial baloon re: public opinion.
Thanks for finding this stuff @WetGeek , it's been interesting reading today.

WetGeek

brent chrome descendants (forks?) can refuse to participate (disable the internals) afaik, I guess.

According to the email from Vivaldi, chromium has hidden settings that can be used to enable/disable FLoC. It seems that other browsers based on chromium can simply turn it off that way. Why hidden? Why not let us all know how to turn FLoC off, like we know how to control other browser features like DRM?

This story certainly provides plenty of material for new conspiracy theories. We haven't heard from Mulder and Scully yet. The truth is out there!

Harvey

I have made it no secret that I am not a fan of Opera despite being its maintainer on Solus. (If anyone knows packaging for Solus, uses Opera and wants to take over, you can. Just talk to me about it. I have some small expectations).

Opera has bigger concerns than this statement and I think Opera's response on the matter is all that needed to be said. Clearly they are not trying to exploit this decision to drive adoption of their browser. Which I would say I appreciate but honestly I do not think its intentional, their marketing / direction is just... gawd awful unless of course you think RGB syncing in a browser is cool. Additionally Opera can't even manage to make a blog post / changelog for a new release available half the time so a well thought out response is a bit much to ask.

An if you think Google is the devil or googles control of the web scares you but you use ANY chromium based browser. Then you are wearing blinkers. Using a chromium based browser is at least a partial win for Google. An considering Brave's history, why exactly should I trust them more than Google? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)#Controversies "mistake" my ass... if they see an opportunity to make money off you they will. Difference between Brave and Google is that Brave pretends to be different, but make no mistake YOU are the product.

For the record my main browser is Firefox and I use Vivaldi as a secondary browser.

Solarmass

Harvey For the record my main browser is Firefox and I use Vivaldi as a secondary browser.

Yep!

CorvusRuber

Thank the gods for GDPR.

[deleted]

i use Tor,no worries for me.

DataDrake

[deleted] Tor will not protect you from this. Tor only obfuscates traffic. It doesn't anonymize the data you transmit.

[deleted]

and also i would like to know if this affects good ol' firefox (it shouldnt, right??)

DataDrake

[deleted] Firefox has no reason to adopt this. It would basically need to become a W3C standard for them to even consider it.

Girtablulu

I read today that WordPress will not support it at all

CorvusRuber

WetGeek According to the email from Vivaldi, chromium has hidden settings that can be used to enable/disable FLoC. It seems that other browsers based on chromium can simply turn it off that way. Why hidden? Why not let us all know how to turn FLoC off, like we know how to control other browser features like DRM?

Compile time settings, perhaps ?

WetGeek

CorvusRuber Compile time settings, perhaps ?

Yeah, but I wasn't asking how they could do it. I was asking why they should do it. And if they did, I think that setting should default to OFF, like the one for DRM.

tomscharbach

WetGeek

WetGeek My reasoning was that if I clicked a link in an email, e.g,, an advertisement I wanted to see, I didn't want that to be blasted into a browser where I was working with a banking session, or trading stocks on my brokerage page. Or the sites I was streaming.

I attempt to resolve the tracking and cross-pollination issues in three ways: (1) I isolate my financial, medical and other sensitive activities in Firefox containers to mitigate the risk of cross-pollination of cookies to and from those sites; (2) I use Cookie AutoDelete in all browsers to help remove tracking cookies as tabs are opened and close; and (3) I follow other safe-web practices (e.g. not storing history, deleting cookies, caches and other data from the browser at the close of each session, blocking tracking cookies using anti-tracking tools in the browser). The combination is no guarantee, of course, but between them I am reasonably protected.

FLoC may be good, bad or indifferent from a privacy standpoint. However, the two browsers I use (Firefox and Edge) are both distributed by companies (Microsoft and Mozilla) that have declined to implement FLoC, so the issue is not currently something that affects either browser.

CorvusRuber

tomscharbach FLoC may be good, bad or indifferent from a privacy standpoint

It's not enabled for countries subject to GDPR (and probably will never be). I think that it's a pretty good indicator of where FLoC is placed in regards to privacy.....

brent

tomscharbach (3) I follow other safe-web practices (e.g. not storing history, deleting cookies, caches and other data from the browser at the close of each session, blocking tracking cookies using anti-tracking tools in the browser). The combination is no guarantee, of course, but between them I am reasonably protected.

and firefox's (nearly all browsers') safe search, which 99% users leave checked including me, is thru google, who get to know what you are searching for even though you are using duck duck go...I just disabled it and I can't see a difference in results.
PS---I continue on my cross-pollination diet, too.

[Hope this isn't FUD, I believe my sources was are sound for this.]

brent

CorvusRuber I honestly don't think there will be anything keeping them from getting what they want here. Maybe they call it a different name, or repackage it, resell it, fly it under the radar later. They've implemented it on select machines (so says EFF) right now, invested millions, and advertsisers probably forming a line around the block to be included in this. Even Opera, above, says their policy is "to see which way the wind blows." Paint me cynical.

WetGeek

CorvusRuber think that it's a pretty good indicator of where FLoC is placed in regards to privacy.....

And where it's placed in regards to history unless I miss my guess.

KingLucius

brent As far as Chromium still open source and FF is still here, There is nothing to worry about that much. We will wait and see what will happen.

CorvusRuber

brent
To put it simply, if you want to be GDPR compliant every user must be able to say "No, you can't use my data for marketing, sales or anything not directly related to the service"; the "service", in this case, is the browser you're using.
If FLoC could be disabled at runtime by the user then probably that thing could be considered GDPR compliant in this regard ("probably" because GDPR is quite extensive and covers a lot more use cases than this), but since it appears to be hardcoded into Chrome at build time.......
Oh, and fines for GDPR infringment are pretty substantials, potentially in the range of billions of dollars in Google's case.

WetGeek

brent Paint me cynical.

I kinda agree with that, at least in the near term. As long as companies can earn many times more by selling millions of folks' personal data to advertisers than they need to pay to the EU and others in fines, the winners will obviously be the advertisers. And over the long run, the companies that provide them with personal info will develop better and better ways to do it. FLoC may FLoP for now, but I doubt if that's the end of selling personal information for profit.

brent

KingLucius Chromium calls home to google servers on startup, too.

« Previous Page Next Page »