> Until [2024], Google says that existing ad tracking technologies will continue to be supported.
Golly, what a surprise outcome. So (almost) everyone wins then. Mexican hat-dance performed, consumers lulled into thinking 'they're good guys and they're listening', regulators happy to wander off for a few more years, everybody wins. Except the consumer. BAU, as the TLA-addicted call it now. (Noting of course that CPOmagazine is targeted at Chief Privacy Officers, whose role is to protect their organisation from the ravages of data protection regulation). _______________ On 26/2/22 6:36 pm, Stephen Loosley wrote: > Google Plans New Privacy Changes for Ad Tracking: > > “Privacy Sandbox” Being Expanded to Android, Positioning as Less “Blunt” > Alternative to Apple > > SCOTT IKEDA · FEBRUARY 22, 202 > https://www.cpomagazine.com/data-privacy/google-plans-new-privacy-changes-for-ad-tracking-privacy-sandbox-being-expanded-to-android-positioning-as-less-blunt-alternative-to-apple/ > > > The “Privacy Sandbox” project for Google’s web browser Chrome has been in the > works for several years now, promising to bring an end to ad tracking cookies > while preserving targeted digital advertising. > > Google recently announced that this initiative is now also being rolled out > for Android, in a move comparable to the privacy changes made by Apple in > 2021. > > “Comparable” is the key word, however, as Google is also positioning this > initiative as a “less blunt” and “more effective” alternative to Apple’s App > Tracking Transparency (ATT) approach. > > Specifically, Google has said that limitations will be placed on tracking > automatically instead of asking users to opt in to each app. The initiative > will also take at least two years to put in place. > > Google tries to walk tightrope between ad tracking business and increasing > market demand for privacy > > The centerpiece of Apple’s privacy changes is a mandatory prompt to opt in to > ad tracking when an app is downloaded or updated. Without that permission, > the unique device tracking ID cannot be used. > > Google appears to be following a different path; a blog post on the subject > suggests that the company is looking to eliminate cross-app identifiers > entirely: > > https://blog.google/products/android/introducing-privacy-sandbox-android/ > > This lines up with the goals it set for the ongoing Chrome browser project, > in which it is looking to eliminate tracking cookies. > > The centerpiece of that project was going to be the “Federated Learning of > Cohorts” (FLoC) system, which would group users together by interest and keep > that categorization at the browser end. > > Google dropped this idea just a month ago, however, after widespread > complaints and concerns that it could wind up being even more invasive than > the current system. > > It pivoted to a system it calls “Topics API” but did not provide much detail; > the planned elimination of cookies from Chrome by 2023 is also potentially > being pushed back due to the change. > > The initial blog post about the Android plan was similarly short on details, > devoting more space to criticizing the “blunt restriction” of other companies > and promising testing of “alternate solutions” with some sort of plan coming > together by 2024 at the earliest. > > Until then, Google says that existing ad tracking technologies will continue > to be supported. > > Google is making its initial design proposals for the privacy changes > available on the Android developer site and is asking for input from the ad > industry and regulators. It is also releasing developer previews throughout > 2022 and aiming for a beta release at the end of the year. > > Whatever privacy changes Google ultimately settles on will most likely not > have a strong impact on the company’s own ad tracking business, which is > largely centered on its search product. > > The key question is how it will impact other major players in the ad tracking > space. No third-party name is bigger (or more reliant) on ad tracking than > Meta (Facebook), which recently revealed that it is projecting a $10 billion > loss for 2022 due to Apple’s privacy changes. > > Like Apple, Google also faces antitrust charges if it appears to be favoring > its own product over competitors. > > The two companies have the unique position of collectively owning the entire > mobile device operating system market in many countries, which opens them > both up to lawsuits and scrutiny from regulators. > > That would seem to preclude Google from shutting out third parties, or > forcing them into its ecosystem. > > The Android developer site currently expands on the Topics concepts a bit, > describing an interest-based system that sounds similar to the privacy > changes outlined in the previous FLoC project. > > One of the changes is that only the top five user interests for a particular > time period (potentially one week) will be used; these recorded interests are > forgotten for the next time period. > > The initial proposal indicates that there will be “a few hundred to a few > thousand” topics that a user can be assigned to; it does not directly address > one of the key criticisms of FLoC, which was that users could be assigned to > categories that would reveal sensitive personal information about them. > > Google appears to be following a different path from Apple’s permission-based > system; a blog post on the subject suggests that the company is looking to > eliminate cross-app identifiers entirely. > > > _______________________________________________ > Link mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link > -- Roger Clarke mailto:[email protected] T: +61 2 6288 6916 http://www.xamax.com.au http://www.rogerclarke.com Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law University of N.S.W. Visiting Professor in Computer Science Australian National University _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
