The Register reports that Google’s Gmail free email service is coming in for a hammering from US privacy groups. Gmail’s attractions include the fact that it’s free and it comes with 100 times more storage than Yahoo!’s webmail service. But Google’s cookies provide a vast database of sites browsed by its users together with their identities; moreover, the company has said it will retail emails even after users close their accounts. The World Privacy Forum points out that this would give Google the chance to create a definitive electronic profile of its users if it chose to do so. Google promises that no humans will read its customers’ emails, but the fact is that the data is there for anyone who wants to join up the dots …

The IPKat appreciates that most email is of little or no interest to anyone other than the sender (and sometimes the recipient). Nonetheless it is most disquieting to think that such a large quantity of personal information can be mosaiced into pretty detailed personal profiles. Whether this calls for explicit legislation or a code of practice is something that should be considered before the existing "trust" system has its first casualties.

More about Google here, here and here
More on electronic privacy issues here and here
How cookies work here and here
Make your own cookies here and here

IS GMAIL BAD FOR YOUR PRIVACY? IS GMAIL BAD FOR YOUR PRIVACY? Reviewed by Jeremy on Sunday, April 04, 2004 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.