Google: Gmail users shouldn't expect email privacy

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/14/google-gmail-users-privacy-email-lawsuit

 

I don't think anyone using any 3rd party email service does.

Neither does Schneier.

 

This is exactly the reason why there is almost no privacy left, because nobody is considering it a right and nobody is willing to fight for it (or at least ask for it)

But yes, basically there is no privacy when using Gmail...

 

http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/05/technology/google_cnet/

 

Why is this so "startling"? Google is a damned advertising company, people need to get this through their heads. You aren't getting Gmail, Chrome, or any service of theirs for "free". You never have, you never will. Want to pout and go to Outlook? Fine, but guess what, they are now doing the same advertising model that Google has been for ages. Think you'll get more privacy on Yahoo? Have a look:https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-2013. You'd be wrong. You may hate Google, but nobody can say Google is withholding the fact that user data is their cash cow.

Folks really need to understand that their definition of privacy and the definition the corporate world and the government use are in two different universes. There is no avoiding, only lessening.

 

It's common knowledge that, where products seem free, we are the product

 

Yeah, this is old "news" really. Anyone who thinks that there is privacy in any email anywhere, web or isp, is fooling themselves... Assume nothing is private.

 

eh, it might be common knowledge on here but i don't think the avg internet user is aware of it yet. and up until the recent spying revelations i think most had no idea the degree of tracking and profiling going on either.

 

Is this satire?

No, you do not have a "right" to exclusive access to someone else's severs. To the contrary, it is your mentality that is the reason we have such an intrusive government apparatus, requiring such an effort on the part of the individual to maintain privacy.

If there weren't so many people with this entitlement mentality, walking around assuming the world owes them stuff, then there wouldn't be such a need to actively protect your own stuff.

I remember an article talking about new things that could get you banned from Facebook, and some moron in the comments went on about how "This is just BS...it's MY facebook account. I should be able to put whatever I want on there..." And I've seen the same nonsense on YouTube.

Facebook, YouTube, Gmail...these are not "your" stuff. You don't own the servers. You don't own the domain. You even don't pay for the bandwidth. You don't pay for...ANY of it. They are services offered to you free of charge. And yes, the companies who offer you those services place some terms and conditions on that free usage. Oh the horrors. How dare they.

And yes, they make money by allowing advertisers to target their advertisements based upon the data you voluntarily hand over (and voluntarily agree will be used for advertising purposes). Heaven forbid. (How the hell did you think they kept the lights on and your email working?...let alone post billions of dollars in revenue?)

And as implied earlier, this is nothing like the Lavabit/Silent Circle situation. The government came in with their threats of force and essentially proved that there was going to be no way for the companies to ensure user privacy.

That's the difference...and it's all the difference in the world: voluntary vs. forced.

 

what about android users who require a gmail account for google play?

any android users complain is a slap on his face...

 

They can make a fake one with phony information in a VPN/Tor. The phone number can be from SIP/VOIP.

 

I'm on Android and I had a Play account before I went to Gmail. But, if you have a Nexus 7 or something, you might as well go all out Google. You won't be in any worse shape than you were before.

 

No, it is my opinion.

So, because I am standing up for my rights, you have an intrusive government? Is this satire?

You seem to focus on owning stuff and paying money, I was talking about ethics and rights, so I don't see where your arguments fits in.

There is always an option, but the big companies will side with the government instead of their users because otherwise they might lose their profits. There is no real "forcing" here... I heard so many times the words "I didn't have any choice" when it came to doing bad things to other people, that I'm sick of it.

And going back to the original topic, here is a slightly different opinion on the subject:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/14/4621474/yes-gmail-users-have-an-expectation-of-privacy

 

Your right to what? Free email?

Unless you own the servers, you don't have a right to dictate anything about them. So what rights are you talking about? Your right to free email?

"Do what I say, or be put in a cage" is not a list of "options." It is coercion through the threat of force. When agents of the government dictate an order, it is backed by the threat of physical violence. All government is. I guarantee, if you don't do what the government agents tell you, at some point you will be threatened with a gun. Probably lots of them. You will be placed in a cage. And if you resist being put in the cage, you will be attacked with as much physical force as necessary to subdue you. (Often times, more so.) (If you doubt me, write a letter to the IRS telling them you will no longer be paying taxes...and no matter what they say or do, refuse to pay. See what happens. Unless you have high-ranking government friends, I guarantee it'll go down exactly like I described.)

So rather than face that false choice of "give us the info we want and compromise your customer's privacy, or be placed in a cage", the owners of Silent Circle (and as much as possible, Lavabit) decided to shut their operation down, so that there was no info to give.

I fail to see how that article changes anything. You still have no expectation of privacy exceeding what is expressly granted in the terms of service. And as far as most privacy-conscious people are concerned, that means not really much of any.

 

You have as much privacy as you're willing to create. "Trust no one."

 

You keep talking about free/payment, and I keep talking about the right to privacy when using an internet service. Unfortunately, it seems that we have different ideas about what "having rights" means, maybe I'm not clear enough when I am expressing myself, or maybe there is a cultural difference between us/our countries that makes us see things differently. So, I am going to rest my case and leave things as they are...

 

But what really is privacy? The ability to not have the government siphon up your emails and other digital data? Google nor anyone else can be expected to help there and they shouldn't take the heat for it. They don't make that call.

Freedom from ads? If you want to pay for every last service you use and even have to pay for access to every website, then that's fine. However, if you don't want to, then you have to compromise. Google tells you quite openly what you give in return for what they give.

Freedom from tracking? That's not as difficult. Even Gmail works just fine with things like ABP and EasyPrivacy, which blocks said trackers (if you don't use "acceptable ads"). Hell, NoScript alone kills tracking dead in its..tracks

Freedom from 3rd parties buying your data from the services you use? Good luck with that because if you're not willing to pay, and you're not willing to view ads, then money will have to come from another source, hence "Big Data".

Freedom from hackers? You're largely out of control with cloud storage providers and other services where your data is stored on the servers of someone else. Both you and the provider need sound, yet reasonable security practices.

People still want a free ride without compromise and I'm afraid it just doesn't work that way. And "rights" have become sorely misunderstood, both in the physical and digital world.

 

Wrong. Lavabit and SilentCircle stood up. Google and other giants could as well. Close down your email servers.

 

Lol, um...yeah...Lavabit and SilentCircle are worlds apart from the likes of Google, MS and others. Are you seriously suggesting every company that doesn't want to cooperate with government policy shuts themselves down? The web itself can't afford for them to do that. Do you have even the slightest clue of the damage that would cause? This isn't just email privacy we're dealing with here. It affects every service, from email to search. Would you like Google to shut down its search engine too? Say goodbye to Startpage and other more private alternatives. How about Bing? Say goodbye to Yahoo search as well. Would you care to come up with your own search engine then please, so, you know, the Internet is searchable?

I love watching people make things completely black or white and thinking everything is so simple