Hot Take Google Confirms Bad News For 3 Billion Chrome Users

[nicolaasjan]

Forbes:
Google Confirms Bad News For 3 Billion Chrome Users

In a shock move, Google has suddenly confirmed that its long-awaited killing of Chrome’s dreaded tracking cookies has just crashed and burned. The company was struggling to agree an approach with regulators that balanced its own interests with those of the wider marketing industry—but no-one expected this. Coming just days after Apple warned that Chrome is always watching, the timing could not be worse.

“We are proposing an updated approach that elevates user choice,” the company teased on July 22, before dropping its bombshell. “Instead of deprecating third-party cookies, we would introduce a new experience in Chrome that lets people make an informed choice that applies across their web browsing.”

But before you ask too many questions as to what that means, we don’t yet know. It likely means you can choose between tracking cookies, Google’s semi-anonymous Topics API, and its semi-private browsing. You’ll be able to change your choice—which will apply across the web—at any time. But there’s still a catch—even this isn’t yet agreed. “We're discussing this new path with regulators,” Google said, with the UK’s CMA replying “we will need to carefully consider Google’s new approach.”

This is bad news for Chrome’s 3 billion users, most of whom will never change their settings and would be much better served by a browser that’s more private by default. This was the focus of Apple’s attack ad on Chrome, dressed up as a pro-Safari promotion, which recreated scenes from Hitchcock’s The Birds to depict users being constantly spied upon as they browse the web, before Safari comes to the rescue.

Ironically, just hours before this shock news, EFF warned that “Privacy Sandbox is Google’s way of letting advertisers keep targeting ads based on your online behavior, even after Chrome completes its long overdue phaseout of third-party cookies.”

Google’s Privacy Sandbox program, which was intended to find a replacement for tracking cookies has seemed plagued since its inception with various false starts. The latest iteration has been the collation of users into likeminded groups, but Apple made its view clear in a WebKit update released alongside its attack ads that such a move would not prevent digital fingerprinting as promised.

“We look forward to continued collaboration with the ecosystem on the next phase of the journey to a more private web,” Google signed off its announcement. But in a move that keeps tracking cookies in place, while essentially admitting that its Plan B towards the lofty goal of a more private web has failed, it risks coming across as somewhat hollow. Let’s not forget that Google’s promise to kill tracking cookies celebrated its fourth birthday earlier this year.

EFF warns that Google’s decision “underscores their ongoing commitment to profits over user privacy. Safari and Firefox have blocked third-party cookies by default since 2020, when Google pledged to do the same. Third-party cookies are one of the most pervasive tracking technologies, enabling advertising companies and data brokers to collect and sell information about users’ online activities.”
You can expect serious analysis of this story over the coming days.
Watch this space…

 

[Bot]

This is indeed disappointing news. Google's decision to not deprecate third-party cookies is a setback for user privacy. It seems like the focus is more on profitability than user privacy, which is concerning. The proposed "choice" may not benefit users who aren't tech-savvy enough to understand or change their settings. Looking forward to more analysis on this issue.

 

[nicolaasjan]

https://www.axios.com/2024/07/22/google-chrome-keeps-cookie-policy

 

[Marko :)]

People still use Chrome? LOL

 

[nicolaasjan]

BTW, here is Google's original blog post:
A new path for Privacy Sandbox on the web

 

[Viking]

People still use Chrome? LOL

I haven't used Chrome in years.

 

[lokamoka820]

I don't really understand why people still use Google Chrome as a dominant browser, it doesn't fit in any category for me:

• Privacy: Mozilla Firefox.
• Security: Brave.
• Compatibility: Microsoft Edge.
• Productivity: Vivaldi.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114834]

I don't really understand why people still use Google Chrome as a dominant browser, it doesn't fit in any category for me:

• Privacy: Mozilla Firefox.
• Security: Brave.
• Compatibility: Microsoft Edge.
• Productivity: Vivaldi.

You have 3 browsers listed with chromium DNA.

This thread reminds me of "don't use Google" typed on an Android via a Google search.

 

[lokamoka820]

You have 3 browsers listed with chromium DNA.

But all of them far better than Google Chrome itself.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114834]

But all of them far better than Google Chrome itself.

That is a matter of personal opinion and perspective as far as how it reflects the OPs points, is still undetermined.

 

[lokamoka820]

That is a matter of personal opinion and perspective as far as how it reflects the OPs points, is still undetermined.

I forget to add "for me" after the sentence, my bad.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114834]

I forget to add "for me" after the sentence, my bad.

I think your missing the point of the chromium coding and how it affects the other variations. So literally your post does not address the OP it just states what you prefer to access the net with.

If you'd like to address the OP you could start with users utilizing 3rd party applications to block ads/trackers. Most VPNs do this now days, DNS services ect. Not to mention doing it directly in Chrome.

 

[enaph]

I don't really understand why people still use Google Chrome as a dominant browser, it doesn't fit in any category for me:

• Privacy: Mozilla Firefox.
• Security: Brave.
• Compatibility: Microsoft Edge.
• Productivity: Vivaldi.

Mozilla Firefox is one of the least private browsers out of the box however it can be tweaked for better privacy.
Vivaldi and Brave are way better options for good level of privacy by default.

 

[SeriousHoax]

Using browsers with blocking third-party cookies for many years without any issue. Had compatibility only on two websites one of which I never need to visit anyway, and the other one was regarding downloading from Google Drive which Google fixed anyway since they were planning to deprecate third-party cookies.

https://www.axios.com/2024/07/22/google-chrome-keeps-cookie-policy

View attachment 284453

Money always wins

 

[lokamoka820]

Mozilla Firefox is one of the least private browsers out of the box however it can be tweaked for better privacy.

Agree.

Vivaldi and Brave are way better options for good level of privacy by default.

Really Vivaldi more private by default?

 

[enaph]

Really Vivaldi more private by default?

Yes.
Firefox has been criticized for collecting user data, including sending user data to Alphabet and Nest (Google advertising companies) apart from Google Analytics. Vivaldi, on the other hand, does not collect or store user data.
Vivaldi encrypts all traffic with HTTPS by default, whereas Firefox only enables HTTPS encryption for certain sites.
And I am not even mentioning built in ads and trackers blocker in Vivaldi which can be enabled during the setup process (Vivaldi asks if user want to enable it).

 

[lokamoka820]

I think your missing the point of the chromium coding and how it affects the other variations.

I'm not against Chromium project, I think Google Chrome doesn't add much over it compared to other Chromium browsers.

 

[nicolaasjan]

Firefox has been criticized for collecting user data, including sending user data to Alphabet and Nest (Google advertising companies)

Where can I find the source of that information?

As far as I know, Firefox does not directly send user data to Google.
Do you refer to the safe browsing feature?
In that case, a list of known malware sites is fetched from Google, but no information about the sites you visit is sent.
See here.

The use of Google Analytics on Mozilla domains is anonymous.
See this 10 year old bug:

Yes, www.mozilla.org (among 70 other websites at Mozilla) use Google Analytics premium to understand how our websites are working, to find problems, and to improve the user experience. Our Google Analytics premium account is set to opt-out on all of 3rd party uses of the data and the only people who have access to the anonymous aggregated data is Mozilla Employees. This is not the normal Google Analytics setup that most people use on other websites.

Also, to increase privacy we flipped the anonymize flag in the Google Analytics request via bug 946705 since that is not something enabled by default. We also create a single Google Analytics web property per sub-domain (www.mozilla.org, developer.mozilla.org, support.mozilla.org, etc.) and don't do any cross-domain cookies within Google Analytics. Google Analytics on www.mozilla.org is set to the www sub-domain and not the entire TLD of mozilla.org.

 

[SpiderWeb]

They got singlehandedly sabotaged by Microsoft which is impossible to use without 3rd party cookies. I deeply hate how you log into one service and it throws you through a redirect carousel because M$ has managed to make even the simplest things like checking your email incredibly bloated. Google must tow the line and kill 3rd party cookies the same way Apple killed Adobe Flash. Some standards simply deserve to die.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114834]

I'm not against Chromium project, I think Google Chrome doesn't add much over it compared to other Chromium browsers.

I'm trying to convey that Chromium uses the same mechanisms for handling 3rd party tracking cookies found in Chrome. That by using other browsers built in Chromium you still gave the same issue.