Google, Privacy, and You

Originally published by Heather Holmes.

 

 

Attribution: http://bit.ly/31a0yIr

The subject of a recent opinion piece in the New York Times discusses the “privacy paradox,” a sort of cognitive dissonance that compels us to share information about ourselves on every available platform while simultaneously cursing the technology that makes our compulsive sharing habits so addictive. Sometimes we’re the beneficiaries of all this data collection, and sometimes we’re the victims. Our feelings change depending on our perspective and our information needs at any given moment. When our data is used to help with something location-specific like a map, for example, we’re happy to be found, but when all of our whereabouts are tracked, recorded, and exploited for profit, we’d rather stay lost. Even when your Location Services feature is turned off, it’s still hard to fall off the radar. Why? Because, Google periodically pings your device. Google is watching.

Mapping your location via the devices you carry is but one way that Google disrespects your boundaries. Google tracks you in all sorts of ways. Not only is the Google search engine itself is an effective tracker of your online behavior; the Chrome web browser records plenty of personal data as well. Google offers you a premium web surfing experience with it’s clean, user-friendly interface, while, behind the scenes, the company is gathering data to create a personal profile of what you buy, where you go, and how you engage with the online world. Google collects this information to facilitate use of their products and to integrate your online experience, while, of course, profiting from the sale of your many identity markers to those who wish to sell you what they know you can’t resist. Google CEO Sundar Pichai recently defended this practice in a New York Times op-ed as part of a larger PR campaign extolling the the virtues of privacy and data security. The company’s efforts to promote goodwill don’t end there.

At its annual developer conference just weeks ago, Google reinforced its commitment to privacy with the launch of two new efforts — better cookie controls and guards against fingerprinting. Additional trust-building measures are likely in the works (including security features in the redesign of Gmail), especially as increasing numbers of users defect from Google to alternative browsers like Brave and Vivaldi.

The takeaway for legal professionals:

Practicing attorneys are increasingly understood to have an ethical obligation to understand and research the technology they use, and to ensure that data brokers (such as Google) are not able to improperly access or distribute confidential client data. It is important to recognize that a lot of free or low-cost technology used by professionals including attorneys may not meet the ethical requirement to protect confidential client information, though understanding whether a risk exists with any particular product can sometimes be impossible due to corporate obfuscation.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://bit.ly/2Krk7WC
via Abogado Aly Website