Google’s New Cookie Program More Crumble Than Cookie

Written by Evan Schuman
July 19th, 2007

Google this week launched a new cookie program, aimed at appeasing privacy advocates. The search giant changed the cookies’ expiration date from 2038 to two years after the consumer’s last visit to Google.

At first glance, it sounded like an accommodating change. In reality, it’s far from clear whether it truly gives privacy groups anything. First, giving up the 2038 date was easy, given that it’s highly likely the Google cookie of today (or of a few years ago) will be entirely irrelevant to the Web user of 2038.

Much more importantly, though, is the practical impact today. That 2-year clock doesn’t start ticking until the individual’s last visit to Google. If they search for anything or follow a link from anywhere that happens to land on Google, the clock starts up again. The user doesn’t have to visit Google once a week or once a month. If they visit just once within two years, they’re back to square one.

Peter Fleischer, Google’s privacy counsel (guess that’s like being the environmentalist advocate reporting to James Watt or perhaps being the Public Librarian Delegate to, pointed out that users should always remove their own cookies themselves. “We were mindful of the fact that users can always go to their browsers to change their cookie management settings, e.g. to delete all cookies, delete specific cookies, or accept certain types of cookies (like first-party cookies) but reject others (like third-party cookies),” Fleischer said in a Google blog post.

Of course, very few consumers bother to deal with cookie cleanup.

Also, in the world of privacy problems and Google, the expiration of a cookie is a minor matter. Any cookie data older than two years is probably worthless to an advertiser anyway?another reason this wasn’t an especially generous concession?and there are many more significant privacy threats.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.