The company particularly named Google’s new rules for tracking people on the Internet “brazen disregard for users’ privacy.”
Changes coming on Sunday allow the so-called “fingerprints”, allowing online advertisers to collect more data on users, including their IP addresses and information about their devices.
Google says this data is already widely used by other companies and they continue to stimulate responsible data use.
However, the company previously opposed this data collection by saying In the blog of 2019 This fingerprint “undermines the user’s choice and incorrect”.
But in a pillar Announcement of new rules changes, Google said the way people used internet – such as smart -tel and consoles – meant more difficult to focus on users’ advertising, using a regular data collection that users manage consent to cookies .
It also states that additional privacy options provide security for users.
Google said the BBC in a statement: “Privacy technologies offer new ways to succeed on new platforms … without sacrificing users’ privacy.”
But the opponents of the change say that fingerprint and IP -aspects are a blow in particular, because it is more difficult for users to control what data are going about.
“By allowing fingerprints, Google has given itself – and the advertising industry it dominates is a permit to use a form of tracking, which people can’t do much to stop,” said Martin Thomson, a great Mozilla engineer, Google rival.
Finger appeal collects information about the device and the browser of the person and brings it together to create this person’s profile.
Information is not going to accurately for advertising to people, but it can be used to focus on specific ads based on this user.
For example, to correctly display the web -shaped screen or set the person’s tongue necessary for the correct display.
But if this is combined with their hourly zone, the browser type, the battery level – and many other data points – it can create a unique settings combination that facilitates the development that uses the web service.
These details, along with whose IP -Drass is a unique identifier used by Internet -have previously been banned by Google for ads for advertising.
Companies in particular say that unlike the fakes, which are small files stored on the local device, users control, or send information about fingerprints to advertisers.
“Clearly allowing the tracking technique they previously called incompatible users’ control, Google emphasizes its constant priority for privacy,” said Lena Cohen, a technologist at the Electronic Frontier Fund.
“The same tracking methods that Google claims are important for online advertising, also subjected to confidential information by data brokers, observation companies and law enforcement,” she added.
“My argument is that the fingerprint is sitting in a slightly gray zone,” says Pete Wallace with a Gumgum advertising company.
“Should people feel comfortable staying in a gray area of privacy? I would say” no, “he adds.
Gumgum, which worked with BBC on advertising companies earlier, counts on what is called contextual advertising that uses other data for targeted advertising users, such as keywords on the site on which they are, not their personal data.
Mr Wallace says that the fingerprint permit is a shift in the industry.
“Growing your fingers that it will take much more focused on the business drive to the use of consumers, not to the consumer approach,” he says.
“This kind of turning, in my opinion, hurts the fact that the industry seemed to take this idea to really put consumer privacy to the fore.”
He adds that he hopes that advertising technology companies have come to the conclusion that this is not a suitable way to use consumer data, “but expects them to consider fingerprints as an option for better target advertising.
Advertising is a life -based life -bizzi service and allow many sites to be freely available to users without paying access to them directly.
But in return for users often have to give up private information about themselves so that advertisers can show them appropriate advertising.
In the UK, watchdog, information department (ICO), says: “Accessible fingers are not a fair means of tracking users on the Internet, since it is likely to reduce the choice of people and control how their information is going.”
In A Message in the blog In December, ICO Risk Executive Director Stephen Mandal wrote: “We believe that this change is irresponsible.”
He added that advertisers and businesses that decide to use this technology should demonstrate how they are within the data and privacy in the UK.
“Based on our understanding of how fingerprint methods are used for advertising, it is a high rally for a meeting,” he wrote.
Google said in a statement: “We look forward to further discussions with the ICO about this change of politics.
“We know that data, such as IP -Sades, are already commonly used in this field, and Google has been using IP for years for fraud.”
The press secretary added: “We continue to give users a choice whether to receive personalized advertising, and will work across the area to stimulate responsible data use.”
