Good to know but not good enough

January 20th, 2012

Sorry, Jeff Jarvis.

Google wants to educate you about privacy with a website and campaign called “Good to Know.”  They’ve spent tens of million to get the word out about Good to Know, which has great information on things like how to shop online safely, choose a smart password, and actually understand what an IP address is.

We applaud them for providing a helpful resource, but we still think that Good to Know doesn’t do quite enough.  The info in Good to Know is, well…good to know.  But to truly protect your privacy, you need actions and words.  Restoring your privacy is about more than a public service announcement:  it’s about real people having their most personal information being exposed for all too see.  This is a cause for concern for many people.  It can feel like a real violation, and it requires a strong and effective response.

Anti-tracking software gives consumers a choice,  makes a statement, and takes a concrete and effective action:  that enough is enough, and easy and effective technology can start empowering everyday people who don’t want their every move online available for all to see.

So what should Google do?

3 main things, actually.

1.  Google’s brief mention of Incognito mode, the Chrome browser’s private browsing mode, doesn’t mention its limitations.  Although private browsing mode has some helpful features, such as not recording your browsing history, it really doesn’t do much to protect your privacy.  Private browsing mode was designed for a bygone time when we were more focused on our own computers than on the internet. Today, where we do almost everything online, erasing our browsing history doesn’t cover our tracks on the internet.

Is it just us, or does this guy have a really small head? Not just us? Okay.

And private browsing doesn’t protect you from viruses, phishing, online tracking, keyloggers, spyware, your employer…the list goes on.  In fact, we put together this cartoon to show you that list and get across the point that private browsing mode isn’t very private.

2.  Good to Know doesn’t make it easy enough for people to stop targeted advertising and tracking.  Their page about advertising is full of quotes about how this type of advertising “makes sense for you” and “makes websites more useful.”  Pardon us, but we think it’s your decision whether targeted advertising makes sense for you:  Google shouldn’t make that choice for you.

They don’t tell you how to opt-out in a particularly noticeable place in their privacy guide; it’s several paragraphs deep in a link.  We’ll make it easy for you:  here’s where you want to go to opt-out.  In fact, Chrome is still the only browser that doesn’t have a Do Not Track preference built into its preferences.  For quick and easy instructions on how to turn on pro-privacy settings in whatever browser you’re using, check out our visual, step-by-step guide.

3.  Google has a slant: they want to convince you of how your data makes Google services better for you.  Literally.  Check out this screenshot from their site:

Google is pretty open about wanting your data.

They compare targeted advertising to the friendly imagery of a barista knowing you you like your cup of coffee because you’re a repeat customer.  This is a pretty no-harm way of putting it when google can read every email you’ve ever written, see every search you’ve ever made, and know everywhere you’ve been online that has analytics.  Overexposing your data makes you more vulnerable to identity theft, phishing scams, embarrassing harm to your reputation, missed job opportunities, annoying ads that follow you everywhere you go online, and turns you into a product that’s literally bought and sold among companies for a price.

*       *       *

If Google really wants to be privacy-friendly, what they can do–and something that would truly revolutionize the internet–is to make all targeted advertising and collection of your search history be under your control.  Despite giving you more insight on what they’re doing with Good to Know, they’re still doing it.

We’ve been educating you on privacy tips and threats for a long time, and although it’s nice to see one of the big guys get behind the privacy cause, we think you deserve better.  That’s why we’re here to fill in the gaps and give you the real scoop from privacy experts.

What do you think about Google’s Good to Know?  Is it something you’d consult for help on privacy issues?  Would you share it with your friends?  Why or why not?  Post your thoughts in the comments below.

Why the Do Not Track header is like a smoke signal

January 16th, 2012

As it stands, the Do Not Track Header is mostly smoke and no substance.

Here’s a good privacy-related quote to start off the week:

“It’s like sending a smoke signal in the middle of Manhattan; it might draw a lot of attention, but no one knows how to read the message.”

- Mike Zaneis, senior vice president of the Interactive Advertising Bureau, on why sending the Do Not Track Header doesn’t really accomplish anything

 

That’s why our privacy software actively blocks tracking requests from ever being made:  we don’t just rely on asking nicely.  When it comes to your personal privacy, you have to stand up for yourself!

To learn more about the Do Not Track header, check out our visual guide to browser privacy settings.

The anti-privacy Facebook glitch that's driving me insane

January 9th, 2012

I’m stuck in an endless loop on Facebook, and it’s infuriating.

The glitch

I like to review which photos and posts people tag me in before approving or rejecting them.  It’s a failsafe called Tag Review–you should try it (here’s how).

So I’m going over the things I need to review, and one of them is a picture in which I’m tagged from Christmas vacation.  Looks fine, nothing embarrassing, so I approve it by clicking the check box next to it. You can see all this below:

These are the things I was trying to approve.

Except that doesn’t approve the picture.  Instead, that launches a window that says, “Enable ‘Friends can check you into Places?’”  Umm…no thanks.  “Places” is the Facebook equivalent of Foursquare.  I don’t want to broadcast where I am, and I certainly don’t want other people broadcasting where I am for me.

No thanks. Seriously. Stop asking.

So I hit “Not Now.”  But the picture still isn’t approved.  Even hitting the “Approve all” button for all my pending tags does the same thing:  it launches a prompt for me to enable my friends checking me into Places.

Why is Facebook forcing me to say where I am in order to approve a photo tag?

Let me get this straight:  is Facebook saying that I can’t review tagged photos of me unless I enable check-ins?  Because that’s what it’s forcing on me.  And the craziest part about this is that check-ins and Places have nothing to do with photo tags.  Or at least this particular photo tag, which isn’t connected to any location.

So. Frustrating.

I took steps to protect my privacy by reviewing my tagged items.  Now Facebook is giving me an ultimatum:  either I opt-in to their Places functionality–which I will never do–or I’ll have my pending photos stuck in review purgatory forever.  I guess it’s a standoff, Facebook.  I’m not going anywhere.

So let me know, readers:  is this just me, or is this happening to you too?

Meet Rocko, our occasional office dog

January 3rd, 2012

Our co-founder, Andy, has the best dog ever, and sometimes Rocko graces us with his presence in the office.  Despite his size, he doesn’t realize he’s not a lap dog:

From left to right: Brian, Rocko, Andy, and James

He also has to howl at sirens and other high-pitched things, which is cool for conference calls.  You can see it in his face as he tries to fight his inner wolf and then utterly fails, letting piercing howls rip through the room.  We love him, though.  Every startup should have an animal friend.

Regular people are fighting back against big tracking companies

December 30th, 2011

Privacy, please!

In a USA Today article earlier today, Byron Acohido reported on how more and more regular people are taking online privacy into their own hands and fighting tracking with free tools like our Do Not Track Plus.

It makes sense:  big companies in Madison Avenue and Silicon Valley make money off your data, so of course they’re opposed to anti-tracking rules.  Less tracking of you means less money for them.  They’ve continually lobbied against the adoption of Do Not Track rules.

So because the big guys aren’t going to push online tracking protection, it’s up to individual people to ensure the privacy of themselves and their families.  And that’s exactly what you’re doing by downloading privacy add-ons and spreading the word to the people you care about.

Sure, more and more people are using tools like Do Not Track Plus to stop Facebook, Google, and hundreds of less well-known advertising companies from following them across the web, but why should you?  Well, a few reasons!

Why you should try Do Not Track Plus

  1. The more data you’re leaking about yourself, the easier it is for thieves to steal your identity.
  2. You know those Facebook Like buttons you see everywhere?  They’re not just buttons; they’re sophisticated tracking devices.  Do Not Track Plus blocks them from tracking you, but still let you use them to share.  Good deal, right?
  3. Your browser’s private browsing mode isn’t going to cut it.  Here’s why.
  4. Online tracking is only getting more widespread and invasive.  The industry is growing, and their tactics are getting better (and scarier).
  5. Why not?  It’s free, it’s simple to install, it runs in the background of your browser without messing up anything or slowing anything down, and it’s got a cute icon:

This icon will appear in the corner of your browser. The number shows you how many companies are trying to track you on each site you visit.

We also realize that you have several options for tracker-blocking software, so we made this handy feature comparison chart so you can make an informed decision about which to use:

If you have any questions, we’re always here to talk in live chat or over email.  Also, check out our informational page all about Do Not Track Plus.

Here’s to real people taking a stand against secret internet tracking!

Top 10 movies not to watch with your parents

December 29th, 2011

Here’s a situation where privacy matters:  watching movies with your parents.  A scene that might not make you think twice when you’re in the privacy of your own room or hanging out with your friends could be the most awkward experience ever when you add mom or dad to the equation.  Even if you’re one of those people who says, “I don’t care about privacy; I have nothing to hide” (which isn’t a valid argument, by the way), there are still certain films or scenes that you just don’t want to watch with your parents (unless you’re a fan of extreme social discomfort).

Wild Things: one movie you definitely wouldn't want to watch with your parents.

To spare you the pain, here’s a list of the top ten movies to avoid watching with your parents.  Of course, we can’t help you if they happen to walk in during a bad moment (and doesn’t it seem like they always do?), so watch those doors.  Some guidelines:

  • We’re only including mainstream, wide-release movies on our list, and we’re excluding indies, horror, gore, exploitation, porn, and other genres that go for shock or titillation by definition.
  • We’re also avoiding movies that are known almost exclusively for being erotic, like “Unfaithful.” We’re focusing instead on movies with scenes that can sneak up on you; scenes that you wouldn’t necessarily expect to pop up when you’re sitting down with mom and dad.
  • We’re sticking to US releases in English (just because these are what we know).

If we didn’t have these guidelines, something like “Irreversible” or “A Serbian Film” would probably be at number 1.  *Cringe.*

Without further ado, here are…

The top 10 movies you don’t want to watch with your parents

(WARNING:  SPOILER ALERT)

10.  American Psycho

It’s a great movie, but it’s got uncomfortable scenes involving prostitutes and Christian Bale flexing and pointing at himself in the mirror while he’s, uh, on the job.  And we don’t mean the investment banking one.  Now if you’ll excuse us, we have to return some videotapes.

I like to dissect girls. Did you know I'm utterly insane?

9.  Mulholland Drive

It’s bizarre and complex in typical David Lynch fashion, and it has some pretty graphic lesbian sex scenes between Naomi Watts and Laura Harring.  You might find yourself watching it with the ‘rents because it’s a well-known “see if you can figure out what on earth is going on” film.  It’s film school complicated with surprise sex on top.

It'll be just like in the movies. Pretending to be somebody else.

8.  Team America:  World Police

Trey Parker and Matt Stone aren’t exactly known for censored, family-friendly stuff, but they make even South Park look tame with an absurd puppet sex scene that spans several minutes and increasingly ridiculous positions.  And whatever you do, don’t watch the unrated version around the parents.  Trust us.

I promise I will NEVER DIE.

7.  Clerks 2

“Clerks 2″ isn’t even in the same category as the original when it comes to sexual content (and thus the stuff that makes watching it with your parents super awkward).  The sequel has donkey shows, vaginal trolls, and 16 uses of the phrase “ass-to-mouth.”  But come on:  why would you ever watch “Clerks 2″ with your parents?

That guy's being awfully forward with that donkey.

6.  Basic Instinct

Even though “Basic Instinct” is known for its eroticism, it was also a popular, mainstream, Oscar-nominated movie, which means there’s a chance it could find its way onto the family TV without anyone knowing what they’re getting into.  Sharon Stone’s character is a bisexual sexpot, and the entire movie is tryst after tryst.  Plus there’s the infamous scene where she uncrosses and crosses her legs while being interrogated, giving the cops a show of the key piece of clothing she’s not wearing.

What are you gonna do? Charge me with smoking?

5.  Requiem for a Dream

This is an all-around disturbing movie, the kind of thing that sticks with you for hours–days, even–after you’ve turned it off.  Although all of the film’s characters suffer gradual demises as the plot proceeds, Jennifer Connelley’s character dropping to particularly objectifying depths to feed her heroin habit.  If you’ve seen it, all we have to say is “ass to ass.”

I love you, Harry. You make me feel like a person. Like I'm me... and I'm beautiful.

4.  Bruno

Not only are there extended scenes in real-life swinger’s parties and an elaborate gay BDSM scenario gone wrong, but there’s a close-up of a talking urethra.  ‘Nuff said.

Look at the four of us; we are so like the Sex in the City girls!

3.  Boogie Nights

This entire movie is pretty damn uncomfortable to watch with your parents, but Mark Wahlberg uncoiling his prosthetic member and telling himself he’s a superstar is the icing on the cake.

I am a star. I'm a star, I'm a star, I'm a star. I am a big, bright, shining star. That's right.

2.  Eyes Wide Shut

Kubrick’s final film gets mixed reviews from critics, but one thing’s for sure:  it’s absolutely dripping with sex.  The marital and monogamy conflicts between Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise would be sufficient, but add in Tom’s solo adventures, especially to the now-famous masquerade orgy, and you’ve got a recipe for complete parental awkwardness.  Fidelio?

That's correct, sir! That is the password... for admittance. But may I ask, what is the password... for the house?

1.  The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” gets the number one spot on our list for its infamous rape scene.  It’s also perhaps the film with the greatest risk of accidentally watching it with your parents because it’s a great story with a wildly popular book series behind it.  Even though the scene is only a small portion of the movie, it’s incredibly graphic and painful to watch, and Lisbeth’s later retaliation–although something you root for when you watch it–is almost as icky.  Bonus uncomfortable points awarded for the father/daughter and sibling rape, as well as Henrik Vanger’s dungeon antics.

Salander never forgets an injustice, and by nature she was anything but forgiving.

Honorable mentions: 

“Secretary,” because the entire thing is about the S&M relationship between a girl and her older boss, and “Wild Things,” because of the threesome scene and Kevin Bacon’s junk in the shower.  Of course, no one really watched “Wild Things” who wasn’t aware of these things, did they?

Bottom line:  the next time someone says that they don’t care about privacy because they have nothing to hide, ask them how they’d feel watching any of these flicks on our list with their parents.  Privacy gives us protection from things like social awkwardness, and it has its place no matter how open you think you are!

The Top 6 Facial Recognition FAQs

December 8th, 2011

How facial recognition works. Via HowStuffWorks.com.

With the FTC currently focusing on facial recognition, we figured it was a good time to  provide answers to the 6 biggest questions about this technology and how it affects you.

1.  What is facial recognition?

2.  How is facial recognition being used today?

3.  Can I be recognized?  How?

4.  What can I do about this?

5.  What are the risks of facial recognition?

6.  What are the benefits?

A stranger snaps a picture of you with his iPhone camera while you’re walking down the street on your way to work in the morning. You don’t see him. He uses a mobile app to analyze the photo he just took of you. The app scans your face and searches the web for matches. In less than a minute, the stranger knows your name and contact info, is scrolling through your Facebook albums, and is reading your Twitter timeline. Predicting your social security number—and thus stealing your identity–is one small step away.

Your face is your identity:  you should have control over it.

Sounds like science fiction? It’s science fact. Say hello to the faceprint, the facial equivalent of the fingerprint. The identifying characteristics unique to our bodies are called biometrics. Iris patterns, faces, and fingerprints are common examples. Once you have a faceprint, you can compare it to a database of faces and look for a match. This is the world of facial recognition technology, and it’s happening right now.

Frequently Asked Questions about Facial Recognition

1.  What is facial recognition?

When we talk about facial recognition, we’re really talking about two different applications:  basic and advanced.  Basic facial recognition answers the question, “Is this a face?”  You see this kind of technology in photo-editing software.  Apple’s iPhoto is notorious for identifying non-faces, like cookies and animals, as faces.  If it has eyes, a nose, and a mouth, there’s a good chance it’s a face.

Who IS this guy?

Advanced facial recognition builds on these principles to answer the question, “Is this a particular face?”  As anyone who’s ever used a character builder in a video game can tell you, our unique faces are comprised of variations on several main features:  the width of our nose, the wideness of our eyes, the depth of our jaw, the height of our cheekbones, and the distance between our eyes are a few of them.  Facial recognition software takes your features and turns them into a numerical code.  Compare this code, or faceprint, with any database of photos, and you can start making matches and identifications.

2.  How is facial recognition being used today?

Facial recognition is alive and flourishing.  It’s used in many broad areas, including social networking, photo editing, security, law enforcement, casinos, and in odd places that you might not expect.   For example, the dating website FindYourFaceMate.com based matchmaking around the principle that people with similar facial features are attracted to each other, using facial recognition to match user photos, and DoggelGanger.com matches potential dog owners with canines that look like them.  Face recognition cameras scanned all the fans walking through the turnstiles at Super Bowl XXXV, now referred to as the Snooper Bowl, running the scans against a database of criminal mugshots.  That was a decade ago, when the internet was still in its relative childhood.  We’re in an age now when Facebook collects 100-page dossiers on all of us, when ad networks track everything we do online, when companies buy and sell our contact information:  the street we grew up on, the names of our family members, aerial shots of our homes.

SceneTap's interface. The app lets you check the gender ratio of a bar before you head over.

Lots of mobile apps use facial recognition, too.  A particularly interesting one, SceneTap, tracks the ratios of males to females and ages at 250 participating U.S. bars.  These bars install face-detection cameras, and the app calculates the number of people at the bar, the male-to-female ratio, and the average age of patrons.  SceneTap doesn’t receive bar patrons’ permission to capture their faces and share demographic information about them.   Another notable app is FACER Celebrity, made by Animetrics Inc., a facial-recognition company based in Conway, N.H., that focuses on the law-enforcement and security industries.  FACER Celebrity is a free iPhone app that allows users to match their face to a star.  The app, which has about 30,000 downloads, uses the same facial-recognition technology deployed by local law enforcement to identify criminal suspects, says Animetrics CEO Paul Schuepp.

Companies give two main reasons for using facial recognition technology:  it helps with security, and it makes photo editing and sharing easier.  On the security side, law enforcement officials have argued that facial recognition can help find missing people, identify criminals in a crowd, preempt terrorists from boarding planes with fake passports.  It’s also used for private security in casinos to identify card counters and kick them out before they can win too much.  Casinos also say their systems identify people with gambling addictions who’ve asked casinos to forcibly remove them if they can’t stop themselves.  Even supermarket security uses facial recognition:  one grocery chain in the UK uses facial recognition to stop underage customers from buying alcohol.

On the photo sharing side, facial recognition can scan albums for faces and either suggest tags or automatically tag people.  You’ll already find it in Apple’s iPhoto, Google’s Picasaweb, Microsoft’s Windows Live Photo Gallery, and other photo editors.  It also collects information on different people’s faces through existing tags:  the more tags, angles, lighting types, hairstyles, and other details in your photos, the better the software’s ability to pick you out in other photos.  It’s one thing to confine this technology to the photos on your own computer, but things get more complicated when the internet gets involved.

Facebook got in trouble with privacy advocates when it rolled out facial recognition by default.  It’s since dialed it back to “Tag Suggestions,” which you can choose to disable.  Even if you disable it, though, Facebook still collects information about your face whenever it’s tagged.  And when you consider that Facebook’s 600 million members upload over 250 million photos every day, you see that they’re building an empire of facial data.  Rumor has it they’re building a way to search for people by picture alone.  And Google’s Goggles app can already identify inanimate objects through photographs.  Add already-existing facial recognition software to that, and you could “identify strangers on the street.”

We recommend disabling tag suggestions in Facebook.

3.  How accurate is it?

The accuracy rate is 99.31% on still frontal face images.  Changes in lighting, face positioning, makeup, hairstyle, facial hair, glasses, and other accessories decreases the accuracy rate.

4.  Can I be recognized?  How?

Yes, as long as you have at least one picture of your face publicly available online.  And yes, social networks count as “public” in most cases.  The more photos there are of you on the internet, the greater the chances of the facial recognition software finding a match.

If someone took a picture of you while you are out on the street, they can scan it and cross-reference it against photo databases to get a match.  You might guess that the U.S. Department of State has one of the biggest facial recognition databases with over 75 million photographs, but it doesn’t come close to the largest of them all:  Facebook, with over 140 billion photos (and it will add 70 billion more this year).  That’s up from 10 billion in 2008, and it makes up 4% of all photos ever taken throughout history.  ImageShack has over 20 billion; PhotoBucket has 7.2 billion, Flickr has 3.4 billion.

Bet you didn't realize exactly how many photos Facebook has on its servers.

You can also be found through existing photos of yourself with reverse image searches such as TinEye or Google.  Reverse image search works by looking for photo fingerprints, exact matches of existing photos.  Merely similar photos won’t show up, but cropped and differently-sized versions of the same photo will.

Let’s say you’re a member of an online dating site, and although you use a real photo of yourself, you don’t provide your real name.  If you’ve ever used that same photo anywhere else, you may be in trouble:  anyone can save that picture and do a reverse image search with it.  These searches reveal other locations where that photo can be found.  Maybe it’s your personal website, your Facebook profile, a people search website aggregating data about you, and a newspaper article.  Suddenly, that person knows far more about you than you provided in your dating profile’s “about me” section.

If you’re worried about reverse image search, here’s a tip:  use different images for different contexts.  Don’t use the same photo on your employer’s profile page that you have as your Facebook profile picture.  Keep separate photos you use for work, photos you use for family, photos you use for friends, and photos you want to keep entirely private.  That way, someone doing a reverse search with a particular image will only find a limited set of results:  the ones you’ve chosen to associate with that image.

5.  What are the risks of facial recognition?

Take the massive amount of information that Google, Facebook, ad networks, data miners, and people search websites are collecting on all of us; add the info that we voluntarily provide to dating sites, social networks, and blogs; combine that with facial recognition software; and you have a world with reduced security, privacy, anonymity, and freedom.  Carnegie Mellon researchers predict that this is “a world where every stranger in the street could predict quite accurately sensitive information about you (such as your SSN, but also your credit score, or sexual orientation” just by taking a picture.

Risk 1:  Identity theft and security

Think of your personal information—name, photos, birthdate, address, usernames, email addresses, family members, and more—as pieces of a puzzle.  The more pieces a cyber criminal has, the closer he is to solving the puzzle.  Maybe the puzzle is your credit card number.  Maybe it’s the password you use everywhere.  Maybe you’re your social security number.

Identity thieves often use social security numbers to commit fraud. Photo: listverse.com.

Facial recognition software is a tool that can put all these pieces together.  When you combine facial recognition software with the wealth of public data about us online, you have what’s called “augmented reality:”  “the merging of online and offline data that new technologies make possible.”   You also have a devastating blow to personal privacy and an increased risk of identity theft.

Once a cyber criminal figures out your private information, your money and your peace of mind are in danger.  Common identity theft techniques include opening new credit cards in your name and racking up charges, opening bank accounts under your name and writing bad checks, using your good credit history to take out a loan, and draining your bank account.  More personal attacks may include hijacking your social networks while pretending to be you, reading your private messages, and posting unwanted or embarrassing things “as” you.

The research:  how facial recognition can lead to identity theft

Carnegie Mellon researches performed a 2011 facial recognition studyusing off-the-shelf face recognition software called PittPatt, which was recently purchased by Google.  By cross-referencing two sets of photos—one taken of participating students walking around campus, and another taken from pseudonymous users of online dating sites—with public Facebook data (things you can see on a search engine without even logging into Facebook), they were able to identify a significant number of people in the photos.  Based on the information they learned through facial recognition, the researchers were then able to predict the social security numbers of some of the participants.

They concluded this merging of our online and offline identities can be a gateway to identity theft:

If an individual’s face in the street can be identified using a face recognizer and identified images from social network sites such as Facebook or LinkedIn, then it becomes possible not just to identify that individual, but also to infer additional, and more sensitive, information about her, once her name has been (probabilistically) inferred.

Some statistics on identity theft from the Identity Theft Assistance Center (ITAC):

  • 8.1 million adults in the U.S. suffered identity theft in 2011
  • Each victim of identity theft loses an average of $4,607
  • Out-of-pocket losses (the amount you actually pay, as opposed to your credit card company) average $631 per victim
  • New account fraud, where thieves open new credit card accounts on behalf of their victims, accounted for $17 billion in fraud
  • Existing account fraud accounted for $14 billion.

Risk 2:  Chilling effects on freedom of speech and action

Facial recognition software threatens to censor what we say and limit what we do, even offline Imagine that you’re known in your community for being an animal rights activist, but you secretly love a good hamburger.  You’re sneaking in a double cheeseburger at a local restaurant when, without your knowledge, someone snaps a picture of you.  It’s perfectly legal for someone to photograph you in a public place, and aside from special rights of publicity for big-time celebrities, you don’t have any rights to control this photo.  This person may not have any ill intentions; he may not even know who you are.  If he uploads it to Facebook, and Facebook automatically tags you in it, you’re in trouble.

Anywhere there's a camera, there's the potential that facial recognition is right behind it.

The same goes for the staunch industrialist caught at the grassroots protest; the pro-life female politician caught leaving an abortion clinic; the CEO who has too much to drink at the bar; the straight-laced lawyer who likes to dance at goth clubs.  If anyone with a cell phone can take a picture, and any picture can be tied back to us even when the photographer doesn’t know who we are, we may stop going to these places altogether.  We may avoid doing anything that could be perceived as controversial.  And that would be a pity, because we shouldn’t have to.

Risk 3:  Physical safety and due process

Perhaps most importantly, facial recognition threatens our safety.  It’s yet another tool in stalkers’ and abusers’ arsenals.  See that pretty girl at the bar?  Take her picture; find out everything about her; pay her a visit at home.  It’s dangerous in its simplicity.

There’s a separate set of risks from facial recognition that doesn’t do a good job of identifying targets:  false identifications.  An inaccurate system runs the risk of identifying, and thus detaining or arresting, the wrong people.  Let’s say that an airport scans incoming travelers’ faces to search for known terrorists.  Their systems incorrectly recognize you as a terrorist, and you’re detained, searched, interrogated, and held for hours, maybe even arrested.  This is precisely why Boston’s Logan Airport abandoned its facial recognition trials in 2002:  its systems could only identify volunteers 61.4 percent of the time.

6.  What are the benefits of facial recognition?

Sometimes facial hair throws off facial recognition software. Too bad there's not mustache recognition software. Photo: AwkwardFamilyPhotos.com

Facial recognition has its benefits, especially for certain groups and activities.

Benefit 1:  Easier photo organization

Facial recognition boasts the end of long tagging sessions.  If you upload all your photos and facial recognition software identifies and tags your friends, most of your work is done.  Even less powerful software that only identifies and suggests tags, rather than tags automatically, can save a lot of time.

Benefit 2:  Greater access to information

If a picture’s worth a thousand words, then a picture associated with a database of internet data is worth an encyclopedia.  You could learn all about someone with a single photo.  This could be helpful for people who need a lot of information in a short period of time:  for example, if you want to learn about a potential date, get some background on a job applicant, or find a long-lost friend or relative.

Facial recognition applications could have special significance for those with prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness.  This condition makes it difficult or impossible to identify people.  You may have met someone a hundred times, but if you have severe prosopagnosia, you won’t recognize him or her.  And for those of us who just have trouble remembering faces, this wouldn’t be a bad thing, either.

People with severe prosopagnosia can't recognize faces. Photo: BodyGeeks.com

Benefit 3:  Criminal identification

If you have a database of known criminals, you can use facial recognition to cross-reference those faces against other databases of faces. With the right technology, you could scan a public area for wanted felons, for example, or see if any of them have signed up for Facebook.  Even if you can try to hide from a criminal past by changing your name, it’s much harder to change your face.  Thus facial recognition is already a valuable tool in law enforcements’ arsenal, and it’s only becoming more important.

Benefit 4:  Money, money, money

If you’re an advertiser, there’s money in facial recognition.  Photos are the key to unlocking a vault of valuable personal information.  The more they know about a person or a segment, the better they can tailor their ads to target them, and the more successful these ads will be.  Your data is worth its weight in gold.

What do you think about facial recognition?

Is it cool?  Scary?  A little of both?  What would you like to see happen with it in the future?  Leave your thoughts in the comments box below.


About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.

Parks and Recreation on targeted advertising

December 6th, 2011

In the most recent episode of Parks and Recreation, (Season 4, Episode 9, “The Trial of Leslie Knope”), Ron Swanson has an unsettling–and hilarious–introduction to online tracking and targeted advertising.

"Seems like an invasion of privacy..."

Here’s a transcript:

(Ron is on the computer in his office)

Ron:  April!  Listen, I was trying to buy this hand-crafted mahogany wood model B-25 Mitchell panchido aircraft…

April:  Aww, for me?

Ron:  Don’t sass me.  And I went to this website, and this ad popped up that said, “Hey Ron Swanson:  Check out this great offer.”

April:  What’s your question?

Ron:  My question is, what the hell?

April:  Like, how do they know who you are?

Ron:  Yeah!

April:  Okay, um… there are these things called cookies, where like if you go to a site and buy something, it will remember you and then create ads for other stuff you might want to be.

Ron:  So it learns information…about me?  Seems like an invasion of privacy.

April:  Dude, if you think that’s bad, go to Google Earth and type in your address.

(Shot of Ron throwing his computer in a dumpster)

We totally agree with Ron Swanson’s quote that all this “seems like an invasion of privacy.”  Shameless plug:  he needs our TACO add-on to block online tracking (TACO stands for “targeted advertising cookie opt-out;” we’re not obsessed with Mexican food or anything).  We’ll hook all the Parks & Rec office computers up.

Facebook auto-sharing gone wrong, and how to fix it

November 30th, 2011

Editor’s note:  it turns out that the image below is a fake–there’s no porn app that’s integrated with Facebook’s frictionless sharing.  We had no idea.  Regardless, it’s an example of the type of thing that can happen with oversharing, and our instructions for changing your privacy settings to avoid it still hold true.

We love reddit for letting us find things like this.  And this, ladies & gentlemen, is reason number 380988390281 why YOU need to be in control of what you share, not Facebook:

Hey guys! Check out Johnny's news feed!

Via scotthowardADTR on reddit.

Instructions for turning off frictionless sharing in Facebook

Save yourself some embarrassment–and spare your friends a barrage of oversharing–by changing your Facebook privacy settings.  When you’re logged in to Facebook:

1.  Select “Privacy Settings” from the drop-down arrow on the top right of your screen.

2.  Next to “Apps and Websites,” click the “Edit Settings” link.

3.  Next to “Apps you use,” click the “Edit Settings” button.

4.  The “App Settings” page will show you all the apps you’ve granted access to your account.  It’s a good idea to delete the ones you don’t use or don’t trust.

fds

5.  Click “Edit” to change privacy settings for each individual app.

6.  Next to “This app can,” remove all non-required app access by clicking the “Remove” link.  See the image below:

steps

7.  Change “App activity privacy” to either “Friends” or “Custom–>Only Me.”  See below:

dfds

8.  When you’re done, hit the “Close” button.

Do you have any oversharing horror stories of your own?  Post them in the comments below!

Facebook FTC settlement: You still can't get the most critical privacy setting you need

November 29th, 2011

Facebook agreed to privacy audits for the next 20 years.

After Facebook’s privacy settlement with the FTC, what you do on Facebook will be more protected.  That’s good news, but it doesn’t address the fact that Facebook tracks its members (and even non-members) off Facebook.  And Facebook knows more about your internet activity than ever before.

There is no privacy setting anywhere in Facebook that lets you block them from tracking you across the web.

Facebook Like buttons are tiny tracking devices:  any time you see one on a site, it’s sending information about you back to Facebook.  We’ve been posting about this privacy invasion for a few months now.

Since the Electronic Privacy Information Center and 14 other consumer groups filed their FTC complaint about Facebook in May 2010, the number of Like buttons on the top 10,000 websites has increased from 3,900 to 16,000 today, a 310% jump:

Source: http://trends.builtwith.com/widgets/Facebook-Like

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg addressed the public’s concern in a blog post, admitting “we’ve made a bunch of mistakes.”  However, he carefully avoided mentioning that Facebook shares users’ personal information with advertisers, both on Facebook itself and on any site using Facebook’s like buttons.  It was a surprising oversight, considering that Facebook’s disclosure of its users’ personal info to advertisers was one of the eight counts against the company (count 5 specifically).

From here on, Facebook has to be more open about what it’s doing with your data.  But this doesn’t mean it’ll stop tracking you or sharing your info with advertisers, only that it has to be clear that it’s doing it.

Our totally free, no-strings-attached (we swear; we’re giving it away for a limited time right now) browser add-on, Do Not Track Plus, stops Facebook from tracking you while allowing you to keep using Facebook your way.  It also blocks hundreds of advertisers and tracking companies.  Learn more about how it works here.  Think of us like the privacy settings Facebook should have had.  Maybe then it wouldn’t have gotten into trouble!

Is Your Personal Information Safe on OkCupid? Our Findings May Surprise You.

February 10th, 2011

OkCupid is one of the most popular free dating sites on the internet.

Match.com’s recent $50 million purchase of OkCupid has OkC’s users worried about what will happen to their personal information.  It’s no secret that many dating sites, particularly free ones, make a profit by selling their members’ data to advertisers.  And just last week, hackers stole 345 accounts from the popular online dating site PlentyOfFish.com after exploiting a security vulnerability.  One thing is clear:  your personal information probably isn’t safe on online dating sites.

The FTC has stated that dating sites must inform new users about how they plan to use their data, and it’s unlawful for a site that claims it will keep your data safe to later sell it to advertisers.  How they must inform you, however, isn’t well-defined:  many hide the fact that they’re swapping your information across the web deep within lengthy privacy policies or terms of use.

Because it’s been in the news recently (and because one of us met her husband on the site), we chose to research OkCupid.com to see how it collects and uses its members’ information.  Read on; some of our findings may surprise you.

Trackers and beacons and ad networks; oh my!

The trackers and ad networks our PrivacySuite software found while visiting OkCupid.com

Even if you’re not a member and you’re merely visiting, we found that OkCupid used four different tracking sites or behavioral ad networks to obtain information about visitors: Google Analytics, Quantcast, Comscore Beacon, and BlueKai.

The site also stores information on your browser using cookies.  When we visited, we found three such cookies from OkCupid.  It’s important to note that cookies get a bad rap:  they’re not always a security risk, and they’re often helpful at sites you frequently visit.  For more information, check out our explanation of the pros and cons of cookies.

OkCupid admits to this sort of behavioral tracking of its users in its Privacy Policy:

“. . . we may partner with third party advertisers who may (themselves or through their partners) place or recognize a unique cookie on your browser. These cookies enable more customized ads, content or services to be provided to you.”

Thought you deleted that picture?  Think again.

 

OkCupid’s privacy policy also states that the site collects its members’ “personal interests, gender, age, education, occupation and certain relationship preferences. . . name, email and photo,” as well as their browser and IP address.  Of course, members usually choose to disclose far more than these things to experience everything the site has to offer, answering questions, taking quizzes, and filling out location information.  Note that even if you delete information from your profile or account, OkCupid states that “we may keep such information archived indefinitely.”  Put bluntly, anything you post on the site may be there forever.

 

One example of an OkTrends analysis on member data.

The site also uses anonymous data to compile the dating research it presents on OkTrends, investigating things like messages received versus attractiveness and personality traits by sexual orientation.

After digging into OkCupid’s Privacy Policy, we learned that they say that “third parties” and “service providers” can access members’ personal information in order to “direct[] and display[] specific advertisements” to them.  Advertisers can compile information about whether you or anyone else who’s using your computer saw their ads and clicked them.  In this way, they build a profile of your likes and interests to target you with ads that they believe you’ll respond to.

We also learned that you can email OkCupid at privacy@okcupid.com to request that they don’t share your information with others.

Match.com now owns OkCupid.  Does that change anything?

Match.com's landing page, on which we found a number of trackers and ad networks.

 

 

Match.com itself is owned by IAC/InterActiveCorp, which owns more than 40 companies and websites including CitySearch.com, CollegeHumor.com, Ask.com, Vimeo.com, Chemistry.com, and UrbanSpoon.com.  What’s interesting is that IAC’s Privacy Policy allow it to share information freely between the many companies and websites it owns, as well as “Other businesses with which [it] partner[s].”

Our visits to Match.com’s landing page and member login page showed the use of two tracking sites (Google Analytics and Doubleclick) and four ad networks (SpecificMEDIA, Adconion, Turn, and Dedicated Networks).

 

Now that Match.com (and thus IAC) owns OkCupid, Match also owns OkCupid’s members’ information.  As OkCupid’s privacy policy states,

“If the ownership of all or substantially all of the OkCupid business or assets were to change, your user information would likely be transferred to the new owner(s).”

If you’re a member of OkCupid and the thought of the many websites that IAC owns accessing your personal information doesn’t appeal to you, now’s a good time to cancel that account.  Of course, our DeleteMe experts can always do it for you.

To summarize our findings about OkCupid’s privacy policy:

 

-       OkCupid.com uses several web trackers, ad networks, and tracking cookies

-       It shares your information with advertisers

-       Anything you post may be archived forever

-       Match.com, IAC, and all of IAC’s properties may now access all of OkCupid’s user information

Tips for staying safe

OkCupid is a great site, but think twice before you share your private info on it.

 

  • Use a browser add-on, such as Abine’s free PrivacySuite, to block trackers and ad networks while you’re on a site like OkCupid.  You can also use it to keep only the cookies you need, deleting those that could jeopardize your security.
  • Only provide the amount of personal information that’s absolutely necessary for site membership.  A good rule of thumb:  if it’s optional, don’t fill it in.
  • Use an alias or a pseudonym, and use an anonymous email that forwards to your real inbox to avoid getting spammed.
  • Think twice before posting any content on OkCupid or any other dating website.  Even if you delete it later, it may be archived permanently.

Abine to be Microsoft Privacy Partner on IE9; Ships “Do Not Track” Tracking Protection List

February 10th, 2011

Browsing with IE9 just got even safer.

We at Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, are happy to announce the availability of our Do Not Track behavioral advertising lists for Microsoft Internet Explorer version 9.0.

”We’re pleased Microsoft is supporting IE users who want to exercise their right to online privacy,“ said Abine co-founder Robert Shavell. ”The level of intensity of spying and tracking going on without users’ permission while surfing is at an all-time high.“

You can picture a Do Not Track list like a Do Not Call registry for your browser:  instead of blocking telemarketers from calling you, you’re preventing advertisers from tracking you online.  When you use Abine’s Do Not Track list for IE9, your browser informs websites when tracking and targeted advertising are off-limits and blocks them from collecting information on you.  To learn more about about how advertisers track you online, check out our explanation of behavioral tracking.

Our list blocks many online advertising and marketing technologies that can track and profile you as you browse the Web.  We update our list weekly to keep you safer and more private.  If you’re an IE user, you can add Abine’s Do Not Track tracking protection list here:  http://www.abine.com/tpl/

Advertisers are tracking your activity online.  Yes, you.

Millions feel there is too much information about their browsing habits being secretly gathered and then shared among advertisers, marketers, and email spammers.

The 4 most common ways that advertisers track you online.

This increase in tracking is causing Internet users to flock to online privacy solutions:

  • 58% are concerned their browsing activity is tracked and recorded for commercial purposes
  • 96% worry their personal information on Facebook and other social networks will be leaked and connected to their search and browsing history. (Pew Research/Internal surveys)

The solution:  Do Not Track protection lists.

Users who add Abine’s Do Not Track tracking protection list to Internet Explorer will receive a continuously updated list of behavioral advertising networks that can track the sites they visit, on the content they click, and even the online shopping carts they’ve touched.

With Abine’s tracking protection list installed, IE9 users will automatically get:

  • More privacy at 86% of top sites that send an average of 83 hidden requests to other servers (often ad networks)
  • A continuously updated list of hundreds of tracking companies and technologies
  • The option to add Abine’s free Privacy Suite for enhanced online privacy

By adopting easy-to-use technologies including tracking protection lists and privacy add-ons from within their browsers, users can regain reasonable control of their online privacy while still allowing advertisers to advertise to them. The FTC has called for the market to innovate and provide consumers online privacy protection. Abine, Microsoft, and other companies offering consumers more choice and control over their privacy is a necessary step in the right direction.

Want to add privacy to your IE9 browser?

Add Abine’s Do Not Track tracking protection list for Internet Explorer 9 today, and you’ll enjoy a more private and secure browsing experience.

About Abine: Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers. Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.


To be (anonymous) or not to be: Should you use your real name on the internet?

February 18th, 2011

What sort of trail do you leave online?  Do you comment as yourself?  Do you think that using only the first initial of your last name, like John S., doesn’t link to you?  Do you use a profile picture?  Be honest:  do you have any idea how many times you’ve left your real name on the internet?

Sometimes fake names lead to real discussion.

Online aliases, pseudonyms, pen names…Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t believe in them.  Nor does he believe in privacy.  He’s a proponent of online openness, urging all of us to share, comment, and post all of our thoughts under our legal, given names.  “The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly,” he quipped in 2009. “Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.”  In fact, Facebook lists using a fake name as an abuse of their Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.

Does having multiple online identities really show a “lack of integrity?”

Of course, this is coming from a man who admitted that he would make all Facebook privacy settings public by default if he could start the company over again.  Is it disingenuous to use aliases online, or is it merely playing it safe?

The United States Supreme Court seems to disagree with Zuckerberg, ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission that the First Amendment protects our right to be anonymous:

Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.

Visit the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s website for a concise summary of your legal right to speak anonymously.

Every day, we have to choose whether to be anonymous online.

Here’s a scenario you’re probably familiar with.  Let’s say you read an article on CNN.com and want to post a response in the comments

A CNN.com comment box.

section.  You must first register on CNN.com, which requires you to fill in a screen name, email address, and password, then confirm the email you used to register.  Alternatively, you can use Facebook connect to link your Facebook profile to CNN, letting Facebook take care of the hassle of registration.  You have a choice to make:  use your real name, potentially linking your name to your comment forever; or use an alias.

Posting anonymously has its pros and its cons.

  • Pro:  It keeps a Google search for your legal name clean.

Posting online is like talking to the police:  anything you say can and will be used against you.  We see this every day in our DeleteMe service, which removes customers’ unwanted content from the internet.  Old questions posted in IT forums, comments on political articles, objectionable tweets, those photos of you partying a bit too hard, that video your ex-boyfriend swore he’d never release:  if you use your real name when posting anything, chances are a Google search will bring up results that you aren’t proud of.

  • Con:  It makes what you say less believable.

Using your real name lends credibility to what you’re writing.  Similar to criminal informants, coming forward with your true identity makes the content of your statement more believable and trustworthy.  If you truly stand by your posting and are prepared to have your name associated with it forever–internet archives can live a long time–using your real name shows your conviction.

  • Pro:  It helps keep your name out of people search databases.

Many people search websites, such as Spokeo.com and 123People.com, collect their listings by crawling the web for all mentions of a person’s name.  Let’s return to our earlier CNN commenting example for a moment.  If you use your legal name and actual email address to register and CNN’s privacy policy allows it to share your information third parties, as many websites do, then it will show up on the people search websites.

  • Con:  Anonymity makes us meaner.

Study after study demonstrates that being able to say what we think without fear of repercussion brings out the worst in us.  With the advent of anonymous online commenting came trolling, cyber-bullying, and general unpleasantness.  There’s even a scientific term for it:  “the online disinhibition effect.” And anonymity can have far worse effects than just discouraging thoughtful and polite discourse:  it has lead to murders and suicides, as in the sad case of Alexis Pilkington, the 17 year-old girl who committed suicide after being harassed online by anonymous people.

  • Con:  You can’t build a positive online reputation through content creation

If you’re prepared for a little self-censorship, posting under your real name can be a smart strategy.  Knowing that anything you say online may show up when someone Googles you, use your postings to your advantage.  Post intelligent, grammatically-correct, spell-checked, well-reasoned content.  Express yourself in the field in which you want to become established.  Don’t forget that good search results can be better than no search results.

What should you do?  Our advice.

Abine's PrivacySuite lets your generate anonymous email addresses.

Think long and hard about posting anything under your real name.  If you decide to do so, ask yourself the New York Times question:  “If this content were ever publicly released, would I be okay with seeing it on the cover of the New York Times?”  If the answer is “no,” use a pseudonym.

Abine’s Privacy Suite, a free browser add-on for Firefox and IE, lets you create and manage multiple identities:  one for friends, one for work, one for family, one for your superhero alter ego, etc.  Once you fill in each identity’s information, like the password and username you want to use with it, you can automatically fill in forms as each of your different selves.

But if you do decide to use your real name, think about using an anonymous email.  PrivacySuite lets you generate alias emails that forward to your real account.  If you ever have trouble with spam from a website or an account, simply block the anonymous email associated with it.

5 Things You Need To Know If You Have An Online Dating Profile

February 22nd, 2011

Roughly 40 million Americans use online dating sites like Match.com, Zoosk.com, and eHarmony.com to find love, and that number is on the rise.  And while many do meet “the one”—17% of people who married in the past year met their mate on the internet–they’re also facing serious privacy issues along the way.

If only online dating were as simple as pressing a button...

Dating sites can lose your info or get hacked.

One study found that one in ten members of online dating sites is a scammer.  Recent data breaches on PlentyofFish.com and eHarmony.com put hundreds of members’ personal info at risk.  Many dating sites’ terms of service allow them to share their users’ information with advertisers and partner sites.  For a detailed example, check out our look at privacy risks on Match.com and OkCupid.com.

We’re offering the following five tips on how to keep your bank account and your personal information safe while getting a date.

1.  Read the site’s privacy policies before you sign up.  Seriously.

We know they make your head hurt, but privacy policies are worth reading on dating sites.

We all hate fine print, but when you’re putting yourself out there on a dating site and investing yourself in the process, it really is important to know what you’re getting into.  Read the privacy policy.

Know your privacy limits, what makes you uncomfortable and what you’re willing to deal with in order to be on a dating site, and don’t compromise.  Pay special attention to the part about third parties.  Find out whether the site shares your information with advertisers, partner companies, research firms, etc.  Will they use behavioral tracking technology to follow your activity on their site and target you with ads?  If they’re allowed to email you, how often and about what?

If a dating site’s privacy policy raises red flags, don’t settle; move on to another one.  Although we don’t quite agree with the order in which these sites are ranked, here’s a list of the 100 most popular dating sites so you can compare your options.

 

2.  Understand how the site will charge you.

Once you’ve decided on a dating site, make sure that you’re clear on how you’ll be paying.  There are plenty of free sites available, such as OkCupid, but many members feel that pay sites offer a higher level of experience, customer service, and member quality.

Some dating sites offer different levels of membership.  Lower levels are cheaper, but your site activity is limited:  you may be able to view other members’ profiles but not contact them, for example.  Or you may only be able to send a set number of messages per month.  Make sure that you get all the features that you want with whatever type of membership you select.

Certain sites use deceptive billing methods.  Beware of “free trials” that charge your credit card when they expire.  If the site has a minimum enrollment period, chances are it will automatically renew your payment when it expires.  If the site doesn’t meet your expectations, be sure that you cancel your account before you’re charged again.  Monthly credit card charges can sneak up on you if you aren’t careful.

Does your dating site offer a free trial or a satisfaction guarantee?

Worse yet, some sites don’t allow members to cancel when they’re unsatisfied with their experiences.  Look for a site that offers a satisfaction guarantee.

3.  Don’t give out more information than you have to.

The personal info you provide to dating sites falls into 2 main categories:  registration/account creation, and profile/site activity.  Dating sites treat these two categories of information separately.

Some sites, like Chemistry.com, get members by having them register to take a free personality test.

Generally, the info you provide in order to register is fairly safe, although it depends on the site’s privacy policy.  The non-negotiable, “behind the scenes” nature of this type of info–you must provide it if you want to become a member—gives it more protection.  Still, you should consider not using your main email address because it can be linked to the other sites on which you’ve registered.

The info you voluntarily provide in your personal profile and all of your public site activity, however, is far less secure.  Many sites disclaim any control over it.  It’s probably archived, and other members can copy and save it themselves.  If you post it on the public part of the site, it’s no longer yours.  Taking quizzes, posting comments, putting up pictures:  it’s all fair game, so think twice before you put it up.

This advice also applies to messages between individual members.  Unfortunately, spammers run rampant on dating sites.  If a perfect 10 replies to your message to profess his or her love for you while asking for your social security number and credit card info (or talking about Nigerian banking), it’s probably too good to be true.

One way to see expose a spammer is to request a few photos.  While a spammer may have one, it’s rare that they have several to back up their faux persona.

4. Well-timed messages from your ideal match are probably too good to be true.

Many members of online dating sites have reported a similar experience when they’re in the

She's probbbbbbably not real

process of cancelling their accounts:  right as they’re about to leave, they get an enticing message from a person who appears to be their perfect match.  Intrigued, they renew their membership, only to find that they never receive a second message.  ConsumerSearch.com writes about this practice,

This looks suspiciously like the website is deliberately trying to lure registered members into a subscription. There are similar reports of receiving a rash of emails or “flirts” shortly after cancelling a subscription, which might be construed as a ruse to lure you back.

In 2010, the federal government ordered the Australian dating site Red Hot Pie to send an apology email to its members for having over a thousand fake profiles that sent out strategic messages like these to lure members into staying (and paying). Consumers also brought a fraud suit against Match.com in 2005 for similar “date bait.”

5.  Don’t forget basic internet security rules.

The same privacy protection rules that apply to all of your online activity apply to internet dating sites:

  • Use a strong password.  Make sure it’s at least 8 characters and that you change it often.  Don’t tell it to anyone.  Combine letters, numbers, and symbols, and don’t make it easy for others to guess (such as using your name, birthday, or “123abc” or other common passwords).  Read our advice on choosing and managing your passwords, and check out PrivacySuite, our free browser add-on for Firefox and Internet Explorer, to generate passwords and manage the ones you have.
  • Close your browser and log out when you’re done, particularly when you’re on a public computer or using unsecured wifi, such as in a coffee shop.

    The tracking sites and ad networks eHarmoney uses to track visitors.

  • Block tracking technology, ad networks, and other forms of behavioral advertising.  Almost every website, including dating sites, tracks its visitors’ activity in order to build a profile of their interests and target them with ads.  For example, eHarmony used 4 tracking sites and 1 ad network when we visited it with our PrivacySuite browser add-on.
  • Delete unwanted cookies when you’re done browsing, either through your browser’s privacy settings or with privacy software like Abine’s PrivacySuite or ChromeBlock.

The advice we’ve given you thus concerns your online identity, but we offer a final reminder about your real lifeprivacy:  be careful when meeting up with anyone you’ve met online.  Appearances can be deceiving, especially online.  Maybe people are not who they claim to be.  Arrange to meet someone in a public, crowded place, and tell a friend or family member where you’re going to be.  Set up a safety call:  if you don’t call them by the expected time, they’ll assume that something’s wrong.

Good luck, stay safe, and happy dating from Abine.

Your name, their database: An update on removing yourself from people search sites

March 10th, 2011

Intelius's people search interface

Have you ever Googled yourself and found your name and contact info listed publicly online?  This is a common phenomenon, and it’s happening to more of us every day.  A few weeks ago, we ranked the best and worst of people search websites:  places like Spokeo.com, Intelius.com, and WhitePages.com that collect and post your personal information for anyone to see and search.  You can get your listings removed, but it’s quite a hassle.

These sites get your info through public documents and records, such as those created when purchasing a house, getting married, filing for divorce, filling out a survey, obtaining a driver’s license, getting arrested, establishing a social networking profile, or voting.  There’s some debate over whether this practice should be legal, and lawsuits are currently pending on the issue.

Intelius is making consumer-friendly changes that we applaud

We scored Intelius the lowest because of its complicated opt-out process.  We recently spoke with Intelius’s Chief Privacy Officer, Jim Adler, about deleting your info, and we’re happy to report several privacy-friendly updates.

This scene from Office Space is a great representation of how we feel when faxing piles of opt-out requests

A bit of background:  you opt yourself out by faxing a copy of your ID and all the information you want removed, such as alternate spellings of your name, past addresses, etc., to Intelius at (425) 974-6242.  Intelius and several other people search websites, such as ZabaSearch.com, PeopleLookUp.com, and Phonesbook.com, all use the same fax number to opt out, which raised our eyebrows.

First, Jim addressed our (and our customers’) concern that supplying these websites with information they didn’t already have would actually add it to their databases.  Turns out you can rest easy:  Jim assured us that Intelius only uses this info to process your opt-out request, nothing more.  Their privacy policy reflects this fact.

Second, if you find your info listed on several of Intelius’s partner sites, you can send one opt-out fax listing all of the sites from which you want to remove yourself.  Hooray for spending less time in front of the fax machine!

Jim also told us that Intelius plans to streamline the opt-out process in coming months.  Details are yet to come, and you’ll still need to provide your ID for security reasons, but it’ll be simpler.  We’ll keep you posted on the details.

If you’d prefer to have our experts to delete you from online databases, our DeleteMe service can help you accomplish it.  A year-long subscription to our DeleteMe service for $99 (1) finds your information on people search websites that publicly list it; (2) shows you images of what we found about you and where in an email report; and (3) removes your personal information from a list of the largest people search websites, including Intelius, WhitePages, and Spokeo.  You can see the full list of sites we remove you from here.

We’ll then monitor the web for your name throughout the year and remove it when we find it, providing you with four reports on the status of your online identity (one every 3 months).  You can check out the DeleteMe subscription page and see a sample report here.

We use a combination of phone, fax, mail, and online opt-out procedures to remove your information from the largest people search databases.  These large databases are the source for almost all other personal information on the web.  In short, if we remove your info from the large databases, we cut them off from supplying it to the rest of the sites.

But what if my information comes back?

Wouldn't it be nice if all your personal info wasn't publicly available online for anyone to see?

Your listings won’t reappear on the sites we opted you out of unless you resupply them with your information, whether intentionally or accidentally. As a general rule of thumb, though, be careful about who you supply your contact information to. You’d be surprised how often your information is collected: for example, when you order something online, sign up for a social networking site, send in a rebate, register a product, or enter a sweepstakes. We recommend using Abine’s PrivacySuite and ChromeBlock software to protect your information when you’re browsing the web.

A page from a sample DeleteMe report

A Swipe at Swipely

March 10th, 2011

How much do you want to share with the world, forever?  We bet the answer is not much.

Lots of people, including many good investors and executives, are confused about how much of your life you want to share online.

Most of us wouldn't like it if our purchases became front page news.

Such has been the fate of Swipely, a company founded and funded to share your credit card purchases automatically online.  You swipe your card, that purchase shows up online, your friends can comment on your purchase, you can rate it, recommend it, that sort of thing.

The problem is that showing everyone–or even just your friends–your credit card bill isn’t cool.  Instead, it ends up feeling like an invasion of your privacy.

To their credit, Swipely has figured that out:  “We don’t think people want to share their purchases. Period,” says Angus Davis, founder and CEO.

We even helped with data for a little study of the tracking the top ten credit card companies do on their websites and it’s pretty clear:  people can use data about you in ways that are not to your benefit.

At Abine, the online privacy company, we totally agree with Swipely’s new stance.  In fact, we think it should be EASY for you to share what you want online, WITHOUT revealing your actual identity and leaving a trail connected back to you forever.   That’s why we offer an
integrated PrivacySuite
complete with the ability to flush away tracking cookies that build up profiles about what you do, as well as easy ways to hide your real phone number, IP address, and email.  It’s all available here, free.

What other businesses do you think are going to learn the hard way about sharing too much of your information?  Leave your comments below or send us an email with your top pick at entry@getabine.com.

To Track or Not To Track? Introducing DNT+

March 15th, 2011

Launching Do Not Track Plus

Abine's Do Not Track Plus makes it easy to personalize Do Not Track.

We recently released a new add-on called Do Not Track Plus (DNT+) that combines some different technology approaches and standards like Do Not Track, all meant to help consumers enjoy better and easier online privacy, into one package.

Here’s the full press release: http://abine.com/news.php

Why offer one solution that supports a bunch of different ways to get online privacy?

First, there are a lot of good ideas out there.

Privacy technologies and standards are evolving and we don’t see some clear winner dominating everyone else (think back to VHS videotapes “beating Sony”).   Unlike advertising companies (often the same companies that make leading Web browsers), we don’t have conflicts of interest around online privacy:  there’s zero reason for us to have any “technology religion” where we push one approach as clearly good and others as bad.  It’s still early, but in some ways Mozilla got it right, Microsoft got it right, Google got it right, and the Federal Trade Commission and Commerce Department are on the right track (no pun intended).  It therefore makes sense that Do Not Track Plus can be a synthesis of effective approaches that empower consumers today, yet leave room for evolution and innovation tomorrow.

Second, there’s the question of timing.

Some approaches work today completely, some work today partially, and others anticipate a very different, perhaps government regulated, future.  For example, Microsoft is releasing IE9 with new privacy features which they rightly point out work today for IE users:  IE9 tracking protection lists actually block different groups of advertisers and tracking companies.  Meanwhile, Mozilla’s implementation of the Do Not Track standard  (made possible in part by a superb group of privacy researchers and advocates including Jonathan Mayer, Arvind Narayanan, and Christopher Soghoian) is a potentially more elegant and easier-to-use solution but one requiring additional buy-in in the future.

Third, avoiding confusion.

Do Not Track is simple, attractive, and understandable language.  That’s good.  However, it’s easy to create a false sense of privacy.  By letting consumers who voice their preference for more online privacy select among different approaches easily (without having to change browsers, or try multiple tools with multiple interfaces to learn), we hope to empower and educate users who try Do Not Track Plus.  They should also learn that online privacy is not just about tracking but also about keeping their email, cell phone, IP address, home address, and credit cards away from too many online databases using tools like our full PrivacySuite.

Fourth, make room for advertisers.

Advertisers need a stronger voice and say in this discussion and need to be more proactive than simply offering opt-outs.  Indeed, the future is murkiest for advertisers in some ways because a regulated Do Not Track would force them to define the meaning of Do Not Track and the technical implementations could be challenging in a variety of ways.  There’s no reason why sites providing good experiences to users shouldn’t be able to have a dialog with them about supporting them and their advertising partners, otherwise known as “white-listing.” We aim to prompt further discussion around is how this will actually work in practice, today.

In conclusion:  As an industry, we can achieve Do Not Track in different ways, and we can do it faster.

Combining and evolving today’s set of proposed standards is technically possible.  And the FTC and Commerce Department have repeatedly called for the market to innovate and self-regulate to provide consumers online privacy protection.  DNT+ can accelerate such innovation and empower millions of users who feel there is too much information about their browsing habits being secretly gathered by a mix of trusted and untrusted parties.  DNT+ works today to protect consumer privacy and help strengthen and define emerging privacy standards within and across multiple browsers.

Give Do Not Track Plus (DNT+) a try and let us know what you think.

Why More Tracking Protection Isn’t Better

March 25th, 2011

You don’t need to run multiple tracking protection lists at the same time. Period.  In fact, doing so can give you less privacy online.  How is that possible?  Read on.

Tracking Protection Lists: Internet Explorer’s answer to Do Not Track, at least for the moment

A recent study carried out by Which? Computing revealed a flaw with TPLs:  if you use two or more at once, conflicting instructions on different lists will allow tracking by default.  You may think you’re maximizing your protection by installing all four of Microsoft’s sponsored TPLs, but you may be doing yourself a disservice.

Of the four sponsored lists maintained by Abine, EasyList, PrivacyChoice, and TRUSTe, one of them—TRUSTe’s—actually allows a great deal of content.  In other words, enabling the TRUSTe TPL alongside any other will negate the protective effect of the second TPL in many cases.  Jonathan Mayer, the lead researcher on Stanford University’s ‘Do Not Track’ Project, explained,

The TRUSTe TPL is almost exclusively what we’d call an ‘allow’ list. It ‘allows’ content from Acxiom, a major data aggregator. If you want to stop your online behaviour from being tracked, the last thing you’d want to do is install a list that guarantees that Acxiom can track you.

Tech writer Ed Bott reported on the numbers of trackers that each TPL blocks and allows, finding that TRUSTe allowed 3,958 trackers and blocked…zero.  That’s right:  none.  Abine’s TPL, on the other hand, blocked 94 trackers and allowed zero.

A comparison of the number of trackers that each TPL blocks and allows (from ZDnet)

Knowing that using multiple TPLs can actually have the opposite effect of protecting you, what should you do?

  • Stick with only one TPL
  • Only enable those that block more trackers than they allow (we’d steer clear of TRUSTe’s list
  • Use Do Not Track Plus, which combines the Do Not Track header used by Firefox with TPLs used by Internet Explorer, for double protection

The bigger point:  what do I really need to manage my online privacy?

Many users go install as much “stuff” as they can to protect their privacy.  But there is increasing overlap between the features and functions of different popular privacy tools.  This overlap creates unnecessary junk in users browsers.  How can anyone decide what to get and what to get rid of?

Here’s what you might need:

  • A proxy
  • A cookie cleaner (including flash cookies)
  • A script blocker that blocks ad tracking
  • A way to opt out of behavioral advertising
  • Disposable emails and phone numbers
  • A referrer blocker or search engine obfuscator
  • Password manager
  • Trusted sites rater

If you have more than ONE of any of these, chances are you don’t need it.

Lastly, Abine’s highly-rated PrivacySuite add-on includes 90% of what you need in one package.  Try it for free today.

 

Buttons Everywhere? “Connect,” “Like,” “Recommend:” Should You Click?

April 6th, 2011

Recently, LinkedIn joined Facebook Connect in its goal of integrating itself into all the other websites you use by offering to little, easy-to-integrate buttons for on any site.   Their technical announcement breaks down what they’re offering:

  • Sign In with LinkedIn, which makes it easier for users to authenticate or register for a site using their LinkedIn identity
  • Share, a button which enables users to share a website with LinkedIn’s professional audience
  • Member Profile, which brings LinkedIn profiles to a site
  • Full Member Profile, which brings larger, more detailed LinkedIn profiles to a site
  • Company Profile, which displays key company info at-a-glance
  • Company Insider, which shows rich company data from several different views
  • Recommend, a button which enables users to recommend a company’s products and drive traffic back to them

LinkedIn has joined the ever-growing list of social networks that have "connect" features across the web.

What can consumers expect from all these buttons?

First, these buttons make it easier for you to login or register at new sites where you don’t have accounts.  One click; you’re in.  Behind the scenes, your personal profile data from the button-providing site (say LinkedIn) is instantly transferred to the new site.  What exactly about you is transferred from LinkedIn to the new site, and what does LinkedIn choose to keep private?  They don’t show you.  And, next, what gets transferred back to your LinkedIn profile from the new site?  Again, they don’t show you.

Second, the buttons allow you to express preferences whenever you feel like it:  to “Like” or “Recommend” something anywhere you happen to see it.

Should you use these buttons?

Every site would like you to use all the buttons and do so as much as possible.  After all, you’re helping them with their tremendous ongoing data gathering and user-profiling exercise that builds up more and more information about what you do, where you are, when you visit sites, and what you do there.  It spreads the information you’ve shared with one site across thousands of others, constantly updating and cross-referencing information about you at all of them.

How to get the convenience but preserve your privacy

Don’t click.  Don’t let your information leak out for others to Google in the future.  There may come a time when that information, which seems innocent now, will become interesting and relevant to someone in your life:  an employer, ex-boyfriend, attorney, friend, whoever.  You won’t want them to see the specific things about you that these buttons have collected and shared without you ever seeing the effects.

Instead, use login helpers and auto-fillers in your browser or that you download (like the one in Abine’s PrivacySuite), and that don’t instantly share your online activity with other sites that keep logs of your behavior and personal information.

Got an interesting story about using Facebook Connect or other similar buttons?  Let us know (info [at] getabine [dot] com) and we’ll publish it here this week.

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.

Massive new data breach: Was your email part of the “Epsilon Data Breach”? Should you care?

April 3rd, 2011

Recently, an email marketing company you’ve never heard of called Epsilon had a data breach where someone (presumably a hacker but they’re not sure) got all the names and emails in their database.  Why is this a big deal?

Well, Epsilon just happens to send emails on behalf of lots of companies you have heard of:

Do the companies above have any information that might be important to you?  About your finances?  Health?  School records?  Of course they do.  But do you have to worry?  The hackers only got the names and email address, right?  What can be done with just knowing your name and email address?  Well…

What we’ve learned from other data breaches where hackers got into company databases is that you re-use your passwords a lot:

When our friends at RockYou had their databreach, the hackers got the passwords as well as emails on 32 million users.  Here were the most common passwords:

1. 123456
2. 12345
3. 123456789
4. Password
5. iloveyou
6. princess
7. rockyou
8. 1234567
9. 12345678
10. abc123
11. Nicole
12. Daniel
13. babygirl
14. monkey
15. Jessica
16. Lovely
17. michael
18. Ashley
19. 654321
20. Qwerty

But even if your password isn’t on the list, the online privacy and identity theft problem here is DATA MINING.  Hackers are good at cross-referencing data.  They can take 50 million names and emails from Epsilon, compare that with 32 million emails and passwords from Rockyou (and other breaches and fake phishing sites), and get hundreds of thousands of online accounts with which they can commit fraud.   It’s basically child’s play.

This is why everyone needs to take care not t0 get too angry at Epsilon, but to get even with hackers and get in control of your online privacy.  Use tools like Abine’s PrivacySuite to manage your account and create unique emails and passwords with the ease of turning on a lightswitch.  Try it:  it’s free, and you’ll be glad you did when the next big data breach comes around.

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.

Privacy with Google Search? Reviewing Google's +1 Feature

April 5th, 2011

Google’s famously enigmatic search algorithm is no longer the only thing influencing search results:  now public opinion will play a role.

Should you use +1?

If you’re concerned about your privacy, what is Google’s new +1 feature and how does it affect your online privacy?

This is how Google's +1 will look in action.

Google is inching closer to Facebook’s dominance of the social web by rolling out +1, its social search feature.  It’s like a Digg, a Reddit upvote, or a Facebook “like” for your search results:  you click a small +1 button next to a search result or a Google ad, and the world will know that you liked it.

Who can see the search results you +1?

Search results will show the number of times they’ve been +1’d. If someone in your social circle has +1’d it, you’ll see his or her name.  The same applies to you:  if you +1 something, your friends will see your name under it.  By default, your +1’s are public. Google explains,

+1’ing is a public action. Anyone on the web can potentially see that you’ve +1’d content when they’re searching on Google or viewing content you’ve +1’d. For this reason, you should only +1 pages when you’re comfortable sharing your recommendation with the world.

It could be interesting, right?  A stamp of approval from your friends, right in your search bar?  But there’s a catch.

What can they find out about you?  Your Google profile

First, you need to have a public Google profile to use +1.  As Google describes it,

To use +1, you'll need a public Google profile.

“Your profile will be visible to anyone on the web, and anyone with your email address can discover it . . . At a minimum, your first name, last name, and photo will be public on the Internet.”  For those of us looking to fly under the internet radar, this requirement is cringe-worthy.

Who does Google consider your social network?  Everyone you’ve emailed and everyone who has emailed you.

Using +1 means granting Google access to your Gmail contacts list, as well as your Buzz, Reader, Talk, and whatever other contacts you maintain with Google. If you thought your contacts lists were your private info, think again if you want to use +1.

If you’re the type of user who doesn’t want your search results or contacts lists to become public information, steer clear of +1.  One positive note about +1, though, is that Google has made it easy for users to delete past +1’s that they no longer want to recommend.

Google is taking its time in releasing +1, perhaps to avoid a highly public blunder like the one it had with Buzz and Wave, but you can join the experimental version if you wish.

And if you already worry about the amount of information that’s publicly available online about you, our DeleteMe service will cut down on it and give you a report on what’s out there.

Alias Emails: An Easy Way to Protect Yourself from the Next Big Data Breach

May 3rd, 2011

First Epsilon, then Playstation Network (PSN)…the question isn’t whether another big breach will happen; it’s when.  But even if big tech corporations like Sony can’t protect your data, you can protect it yourself with a simple trick.

Hackers pirated personal information from over 100 million PlayStation Network users.

Hackers stole the info from over 100 million accounts in two separate data breaches, 77 million on Playstation Network and 26.5 million from Sony Entertainment Online.  The stolen info included usernames, legal names, home and email addresses, birthdates, phone numbers, and passwords.

If you reuse usernames and passwords, you’re at risk.

Here’s the real problem:  because most of us use the same username and password everywhere, hackers obtaining your PSN info can now access any accounts where you use the same login info.  Do you use the same login info for online banking?  Twitter?  eBay?  Gmail?  If so, it’s not just your PSN account you should be worried about:  all of your accounts are at risk.  Sony echoed this concern on their official blog:

[I]f you use your PlayStation Network or Qriocity user name or password for other unrelated services or accounts, we strongly recommend that you change them, as well.

Luckily, there’s something you can do today to thwart hackers who are trying to access your accounts.

The quick (and free) fix:  create alias email accounts.

An alias email is a unique email address that forwards to your main email inbox.  You can generate them automatically, make as many as you need, and block them anytime you wish, especially if you’re worried about your security.

Let’s go back in time to before the Playstation Network breach happened to illustrate how an alias email could have protected you.  Let’s say your main email address is Address@Inbox.com but you’re hesitant about using it to sign up for Playstation Network.  With one click, make an alias email, say Alias@opayq.com, and go ahead and register.  Everything that’s sent to your alias will always show up in your main inbox.

But what if you hear on the news that Playstation Network has been hacked?  Simply block your alias email.  And because you’re not using that unique address anywhere else, all of your other accounts are safe.  It’s that easy.

You can easily manage your alias emails in Abine's PrivacySuite right from your browser.

Ready to protect yourself?

Abine’s free PrivacySuite, a browser add-on for Firefox, lets you create alias email accounts and automatically forwards them to your inbox.  And PrivacySuite lets you control your security in other ways, too:  keep track of your online accounts and passwords; generate random, encrypted passwords to make sure your accounts stay safe; block ad networks from tracking your behavior online; log into sites with one; and automatically fill online forms.

Try PrivacySuite today and be ready for the next big data breach, whenever it may happen.

Online fortune teller: How DNA telomeres can put your lifespan on the web

May 16th, 2011

Have you heard of telomeres? They are structures on the tips of your chromosomes that may be able to predict how fast you will age.

Will you live to 60, 70, 80, 90 or beyond?

Telomeres and aging

Longer telomeres may mean longer life. Photo via ScienceFictionBiology.blogspot.com

Today we can only guess how long we’ll live based on our parents’ and grandparents’ health and our medical state.  But several widely accepted and peer reviewed tests have shown that the length of your telomeres is strongly correlated to how long you may live.  In general, longer telomeres mean longer life.  These tests are getting better, and they’re getting cheaper:  in fact, a UK company called LifeLength is rolling them out to anyone willing to pay about $700.

Would you pay $700 to know if you’ve got a good chance to make it to 100?

As with many other kinds of healthcare and genetic testing information, it’s easy to make it available to you online. 23andme, a Google-backed genetic testing company, has been a pioneer of this technology and of using the internet to distribute this personal health information to customers.  Their price for a genetic profile test is only $99 and is based on your saliva sample rather than blood testing.  The site claims that they test for 24 different inherited conditions, including sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis.

23andme saliva genetic test

23andme uses a saliva sample to provide your genetic profile.

Although only a very small number of people currently use these personal health technology testing services, they’re relevant to all of us because we’re all human.  As more of us access this information, what will happen to this data?

  • Data online about how long you’re “scheduled” to live
  • Data online about if you’re likely to go bald
  • Data online about if you’re likely to get cancer
  • Data online about whether you’re likely to carry a genetic mutation

You may have a social networking profile online, but what about a genetic profile online?

Will insurance companies charge higher premiums to people with less positive genetic profiles, or, even worse, refuse to insure them altogether?  Will employers only hire people with positive genetic attributes and disfavor, or fire, those of us

Genetic discrimination

We already fight gender discrimination, racial discrimination...what about genetic discrimination?

who are less genetically fortunate?  Will our potential dates eliminate us based on our genetic likelihood of balding?

These are open questions, but our experience helping hundreds of users delete just their basic personal information–address, phone number, name–from websites like Intelius, Spokeo, and Whitepages.com (and more than a dozen others) doesn’t give us a lot of confidence that things are moving in the right direction.  Furthermore, deleting your prescription information and health history from retailers like CVS is even more difficult.

Furthermore, just glancing (forget about reading) at the privacy statements from these genetic testing companies doesn’t exactly give someone faith that they’re looking out for their users’ privacy.  For example, 23andme’s Privacy Statement reads,

We may disclose to third parties, and/or use in our Services, “Aggregated Genetic and Self-Reported Information”, which is Genetic and Self-Reported Information that has been stripped of Registration Information and combined with data from a number of other users sufficient to minimize the possibility of exposing individual-level information while still providing scientific evidence.

Will you want the benefits of new personal health technologies?  Many of you will.  Will you be willing to accept the risks of your personal information and health privacy being violated?  Many of you won’t.  Let us know your thoughts – especially if you’re an existing subscriber to these services who can share your experiences with the community.

PS:  at least it’s nice to know that the TSA is not going to be adding DNA testing to its pat-down process.

 

Michael Arrington is so Naive

May 12th, 2011

Michael Arrington, the TechCrunch founder and and technology muckraker extraordinaire, has just put Facebook over the coals for some anti-Google PR, and he’s acting as if he’s surprised to see such aggressive and underhanded behavior from Facebook.

Facebook privacy

And if you don't think they are, you're wrong.

Michael’s naive.   He doesn’t understand how threatening Facebook really is.  Facebook’s behavior threatens everyone, including you.

Although Facebook seems innocent, “an easy place to communicate with friends,” its ownership of our time and our social lives is the result of an aggressive plan to dominate the online world.  Facebook doesn’t just want to know everything about you, your friends, and your family; they want to use that in every way possible to dominate the internet and make money.  While that’s fine and good for companies in an open market-driven economy, the extent to which they’re trying to do this surreptitiously while looking innocent is quite new.

It’s shocking that even skeptical insiders like Michael Arrington remain in love with the company and eager to buy into its “nice guy” messages:

“I’ve been patient with Facebook over the years as they’ve had their privacy stumbles. They’re forging new ground, and it’s not an exaggeration to say they’re changing the world’s notions on what privacy is. Give them time. They’ll figure it out eventually.”

Seriously?  Facebook isn’t trying to figure out privacy.  They’re trying to figure out how to murder it and dispose of the body before people catch on that current and potential employers, creditors, and lawyers will pay big bucks to know all the details of what was once part of your private life.

So is Arrington right that Facebook is essentially looking out for you, or is the truth more like what Julian Assange said recently:

“Facebook is the most appalling spying machine that has ever been invented.”

Arrington Assange

Arrington or Assange: whose take on Facebook privacy is correct?

Facebook’s insistence that users provide their and their friends’ real personal information (and can kick them off if they don’t) shows what lies on the road ahead.  Analysis of what’s going on on the top five million websites today makes Facebook’s drive to first dominate, then open up and control not only your social graph but your entire online life, very clear: they want to know everywhere you go, as Danny Sullivan points out in his estimate of Facebook integrations crossing the 2,000,000 site mark. It’s very 1984.

What can you do about Facebook watching you everywhere you go, insisting on knowing your personal information and your real-life friends, and making them complicit in their game?  Take a look at what you’ve put out there, and start using some privacy enhancing tools even when you’re not on Facebook.  Treat everything you post online as though there’s a chance it will end up on the cover of the New York Times. Ask yourself if you’d be comfortable with the world seeing it.  If not, stop; if so, post away.

Online, you are guilty even after being proven innocent

May 20th, 2011

A very common request we get from customers of Abine’s DeleteMe Privacy service is to delete a newspaper article about an arrest.  The problem usually looks like this:

a) someone got arrested

b) the local newspaper wrote about it

c) prosecutors dropped the charges completely

d) the person’s record was expunged (in other words, the slate was wiped clean)

e) the original arrest article, however, is still online

Now whenever anyone searches that person’s name, the arrest is one of the top Google results even though they’re weren’t guilty.

Google:  Your new permanent record

Google search results arrest

Once you're arrested, your name is tarnished forever.

You can imagine the trouble this causes for the individual seeking the article’s takedown:  difficulty getting a job, a promotion, or even a date.  It seems unfair that even though the judicial system saw fit to remove all traces of the arrest from the person’s record, there’s no corresponding requirement that the local newspaper do the same.  What’s the point of expunging a record when anyone with internet access can bring up an old, bogus arrest? Even if a court of law drops the matter, the court of public opinion has condemned that person for life.

The free speech rights of publishers trump those of individuals

In the battle of the newspapers versus the individual’s reputation, the law is on the newspapers’ side.  They have a First Amendment right to report true information and are under no legal obligation to remove—“unpublish,” as it’s referred to lately—content, even when significant updates have occurred.  In our experience, publishers are generally unwilling to remove articles that were factually accurate when written.  Their reasoning ranges from lofty (saying they don’t want to “rewrite the historical record”) to lazy (they have a policy of never changing anything).

Some publications will remove an article, but only if the stars align and several factors exist:  the publication doesn’t have a strict policy against unpublishing, we reach an actual human being, we reach an actual human being who’s in a good mood that day, we’re able to provide documentation of the dropped charges or expunged record, and the person to whom we speak decides that the facts of the particular situation warrant removal.  It takes hard work, persistence, and luck.  Does it happen?  Yes, but you can see why it’s pretty rare.

How courts have handled the unpublishing problem

The internet never forgets.

Recognizing the damage that a negative online article can do to someone’s reputation, defense attorneys have requested court orders that newspapers unpublish arrest stories about their clients after they’re found innocent.   The few courts that have issued such orders, however, quickly rescinded them in the face of First Amendment challenges.  Simply put, you can’t censor a newspaper’s free speech rights to protect your client’s privacy.

The only research that the publishing industry has conducted on this issue shows a lack of uniformity in opinion and response to requests to unpublish.  (To read more, check out Kathy English’s report, “The Longtail of news:  To unpublish or not to unpublish”).  One thing is clear:  this issue is only becoming more relevant as the internet replaces print publications.  How do the First Amendment rights of publishers stack up against the privacy rights of the accused, and how should courts and the publishing industry treat this balance in the future?

Search engines and content providers, like online newspapers, should recognize their critical role as gatekeepers of information.  They should listen to and consider individual situations, even if they’re not obligated to do so. Sure, a 20 year-old article about an arrest may be factually accurate, but is it really fair to leave it up when it’s not newsworthy and makes it impossible for a person to move on in his or her life? Each case is a balancing act, and a quality publication will analyze the pros and cons, not automatically refuse to help.

Dealing with unpublishing requests:  fair compromises & solutions

Here are a few compromises and solutions we’d like to see publishers and content providers use more often:

Implement a sunsetting or le droit a l’oubli system

Sunsetting is an automated system used by publishers that retires articles about arrests after a certain preset period.  It programs sites to forget, essentially giving content an expiration date.  Just like human memory, sunsetting ensures that some things don’t persist forever.

Block the article from being indexed by search engines

Use a robots.txt file to prevent search engines from crawling and indexing the site in search results.  The article will stay up on the newspaper’s website, but it won’t be nearly as visible (or as harmful) if it’s not on the search engines.

Remove or anonymize names, especially for lesser crimes

A publisher can maintain the integrity of an article while protecting individual privacy by removing or anonymizing a person’s name (for example, changing it to “Doe”).  The publication BloomU Today takes this approach “if the offense is minor and not a felony charge.”

Unpublish the entire article

A rare solution that many publishers consider extreme, removing an entire article may be warranted when it is particularly old, irrelevant, inaccurate, or dangerous to an individual’s privacy or safety.

Add an update or editorial note

Sometimes all an individual wants is an edit at the bottom of an article updating or correcting the unwanted information, and for the most part, publishers are not resistant to do so.  This solution, however, has limited practical effect:  a reader has to scroll to the bottom to find the edit, and by that point the damage has usually been done.  It also has no effect on search results.


 

We’re optimistic that publishers will adopt these gray-area solutions as we see more and more cases where people’s online identities hold back their real life identities.

Is there something online that haunts you or someone you know?  What do you think about search engines and the internet preventing us from wiping our slates clean?  Comment below and let us know your thoughts.

Heads Up, Geeks and Gamers: Bioware is the Latest Data Breach Victim

June 24th, 2011

It’s a hard life being a gamer nowadays with all these data breaches:  first Epsilon, then Playstation Network, and now Bioware.   The well-loved gaming company broke news of the breach this morning to their registered users, warning that “hackers may have obtained information such as user account names and passwords, email addresses, and birth dates of approximately 18,000 accounts.”

Mass Effect 3

We hope that this breach doesn't push back the release date for Mass Effect 3...

You may not have heard of the Canadian gaming company Bioware, now owned by Electronic Arts, but they’re behind some of the biggest RPGs in gaming history.  Bioware’s about quality, not quantity, as shown by titles like Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Baldur’s Gate, and Neverwinter Nights.  They’re renowned for detailed, complex storylines that allow players to choose their own paths throughout the game, tipping their characters towards good or bad (or light side/dark side in the Star Wars universe of Knights of the Old Republic), and they received acclaim–and controversy–for their uncensored depictions of in-game sexuality running the LGBT spectrum.  Due out in March of 2012, Mass Effect 3 was nominated for “most anticipated game” at E3.

Bioware's large fan base gathers in its online community.

Because their fans are as dedicated as they come (you can count this writer among them), Bioware has a thriving online community.  Unfortunately, 18,000 of these fans lost their account information to hackers.  Read on to learn how you can protect yourself (and no, we don’t mean with biotic powers, lightsabers, or blood magic).

If you reuse usernames and passwords, you are at risk.

Here’s the real problem:  because most of us use the same username and password everywhere, hackers obtaining your Bioware info can now access any accounts where you use the same login info.  Do you use the same login info for online banking?  Twitter?  eBay?  Gmail?  If so, it’s not just your Bioware account you should be worried about:  all of your accounts are at risk.  Luckily, there’s something you can do today to thwart hackers who are trying to access your accounts.

Check to see if your email address was taken

If you want to check whether hackers obtained your email address in the Bioware breach–or any other, for that matter–check out Should I Change My Password.  The site “uses a number of databases that have been released by hackers to the public,” and it doesn’t store any of your login information in its databases.

shouldichangemypassword

You can enter your email at ShouldIChangeMyPassword.com to see if you're in trouble.

The quick (and free) fix:  create alias email accounts.

An alias email is a unique email address that forwards to your main email inbox.  You can generate them automatically, make as many as you need, and block them anytime you wish, especially if you’re worried about your security.

Let’s go back in time to before the Bioware breach happened to illustrate how an alias email could have protected you.  Let’s say your main email address is Address@Inbox.com but you’re hesitant about using it to sign up for Bioware’s community.  With one click, make an alias email, say Alias@opayq.com, and go ahead and register.  Everything that’s sent to your alias will always show up in your main inbox.

But what if you hear on the news that Bioware’s site (or any other at which you’re registered) has been hacked?  Simply block your alias email.  And because you’re not using that unique address anywhere else, all of your other accounts are safe.  It’s that easy.

You can easily manage your alias emails in Abine’s PrivacySuite right from your browser.

Ready to protect yourself?

Abine’s free PrivacySuite, a browser add-on for Firefox, lets you create alias email accounts and automatically forwards them to your inbox.  And PrivacySuite lets you control your security in other ways, too:  keep track of your online accounts and passwords; generate random, encrypted passwords to make sure your accounts stay safe; block ad networks from tracking your behavior online; log into sites with one; and automatically fill online forms.

Try PrivacySuite today and be ready for the next big data breach, whenever it may happen.

A visual guide to turning on pro-privacy features in your web browser

July 11th, 2011

Last updated 9/7/2011 to include changes to Safari 5.1.

The browser you’re using right now can block some online tracking technologies–like flash cookies and web trackers that can secretly share your online activities and history–but chances are you’re not doing it.  Not because you don’t care about getting some online privacy, not because you don’t know about private browsing, but because you don’t have time to learn how the settings work.  Well, we’re breaking down how to get online privacy for you, step-by-step, browser-by-browser.

Let’s face it–some of these anti-tracking features are hard to figure out, especially for those of us who aren’t the most tech-savvy, and stumbling through tab after tab of complicated privacy settings isn’t exactly the ideal way to spend our time.

All the big browsers–Firefox, Google Chrome, Internet Explorer, and Safari–now offer built-in pro-privacy features (some more than others), yet studies show that only 1-2% of users take advantage of them.  Why so few?  Some say that people just don’t care about privacy.  We don’t believe that’s the case:  we think people care deeply about their identities, anonymity, and data.  It’s just that some of these features are needlessly complicated.

Before we get started, let’s establish what we mean by a browser’s “pro-privacy features.”  This comes down to 2 different things: (1), using “private mode;” and (2) blocking targeted advertising.  For maximum online privacy, you need both.

1.  Enabling private mode

Most browsers offer a private mode, sometimes affectionately referred to as “porn mode,” in which most of your activity isn’t saved or stored on your computer.  Cookies are automatically deleted when you close your window, and your history of web sites visited, passwords, autofills, searches, and downloads isn’t saved.

There are several important limitations to private browsing modes, however:

  • They don’t hide or change your IP address, which your internet service provider (ISP) can use to identify you.  (If you want to anonymize your IP address, try Tor or a paid proxy service).
  • They don’t prevent websites, advertisers, and ad networks from storing information about your browsing history.  Read:  although your browser won’t store your history, the websites you visit still can.
  • They don’t stop surveillance, keyloggers, or, as Google explains on their incognito page, “people standing behind you.”

“Private browsing” is a deceiving label because it only erases your history from your computer (so you’d use it if you’re concerned that other people around the house might check out what you’ve been up to).  You think you’ve been  “privately browsing,” but meanwhile:

  1. Every site you’ve visited has tracked you
  2. Most sites you visit put tracking cookies on your computer
  3. Most sites you visit send your info to third parties (like advertising networks)

To sum up:  private browsing mode doesn’t let you browse privately; it just stops others you know from snooping in your computer.

2.  Blocking targeted advertising

“Tracking” refers to the many different methods that websites, advertisers, ad networks, and others use to learn about your web browsing behavior.  This includes information about what sites you visit and for how long, things you like, dislike, comment on, search for, and purchase.  They then share this information across the web to show you ads, products, or services specifically targeted to you.

Here’s an example:  after you search for “Texas barbeque” in Google, you start seeing ads for Dallas restaurants and Lone Star State barbeque contests on all the pages you visit.  That search told the advertising networks that you’re at least somewhat interested in Texas bbq, and now they’ll follow you around the web throwing related ads at you.

We imagine the ad networks have a secret underground lair like this one.

Although there are a few ways of blocking targeted advertising, the browsers do it with what’s called a Do Not Track header.  Think of it like this: when you visit a website, your browser waves around a little flag–the Do Not Track header–as soon as it arrives.  That flag tells the website, its advertisers, and other content providers that you don’t want to be tracked.  In theory, everyone who sees this flag will react to it by not targeting ads to you.  Although you’ll still see ads, they’ll be anonymous:  they won’t be targeted to appeal to you.

How the Do Not Track header works...in theory, at least.

Here’s the major problem:  websites don’t have to honor this message.  Following the Do Not Track order is completely voluntary.  Today, 99.9% of sites don’t do anything about Do Not Track.  And it’s not because of effort:  The Associated Press, the first major web service to follow the Do Not Track header, reported that “it only took a few hours for one engineer to implement.”

We’re hopeful that more sites will honor the Do Not Track header in the future, but for now, there’s no harm in enabling it.

Why Do Not Track Plus is Better

We offer more than the “wait and see” approach of the Do Not Track header.  Instead of passively asking websites to “please don’t track me” and hoping they’ll listen, we actively disable ad networks and web bugs from tracking you.  We block your browser from even requesting targeted ads from advertisers.  The ad networks won’t even know you’re there at all.

Here’s an example:  normally, when you go to CNN.com, your browser makes many requests to different ad networks for loading ads and javascript, setting tracking cookies, and more.  Do Not Track Plus detects these requests and blocks them so that they’re never made.

Do Not Track Plus actually BLOCKS ads; we don't just ask them nicely to go away.

In sum, we don’t rely on just the Do Not Track header.  We still send it as a precautionary measure, but we do much more to protect your privacy.  Intrigued?  Try Do Not Track Plus for free.

Now that you understand the basics (and the limitations) of browser privacy, we’ll tell you how to start using it.

Getting privacy in Google Chrome

Enabling incognito mode

1.  With a window open in Chrome, click on the wrench icon on the top right of the screen.

Enabling incognito mode in Google Chrome.

2.  Click “New Incognito Window” on the menu that pops up.

3.  A new window will open with a blue top bar, a right-side icon of a shifty-looking man in a trench coat, and a message saying “You’ve gone incognito.”  You’ll remain in incognito mode until you close this window.

You'll see this screen once you've successfully opened a new incognito window.

Enabling Do Not Track

Google has held out against Do Not Track, instead releasing an extension called Keep My Opt-Outs.  Google bills it as “a one-step, persistent opt-out of personalized advertising and related data tracking.”  Keep My Opt Outs works by installing opt-out cookies on your computer.  These are “good,” site-specific cookies that prevent a corresponding site from installing future cookies.

The downsides to Keep My Opt Outs?  First, you have to install an extension rather than simply changing your browser settings.  Second, Keep My Opt Outs doesn’t actually block any tracking and advertising networks.  Their cookies still allow the networks to store, collect, analyze, and use data about you; they’re only swearing that they won’t show you a targeted ad on that site.  For more on Google’s browser privacy, check out their “Overview of privacy settings” page.

To install Keep My Opt Outs:

1.  Visit the Chrome web store.

2.  Click the blue “Install” button.

Installing Google's Keep My Opt Outs extension.

3.  You’ll receive a yellow notification saying that “Keep My Opt Outs is now installed.”

This bar will confirm that you've installed the extension.

4.  To manage Keep My Opt Outs and other installed extensions, click the “Window” menu, then click “Extensions.”

Your list of Chrome extensions will look something like this.

5.  In the extensions window, you can disable, uninstall, or choose to allow the extension to run while you’re in incognito mode.

Getting privacy in Safari

Enabling Private Browsing

Safari’s version of private browsing is called, unsurprisingly, Private Browsing.  To enable it:

1.  With a Safari window open, click the Safari menu and then “Private Browsing.”

Click "Private Browsing"

2.  A message will pop up and ask “Do you want to turn on Private Browsing?”  Click OK.

Click "OK"

3.  You’ll enter Private Browsing mode.  You’ll be able to tell if you see the “PRIVATE” button at the top right of your address bar.

You'll see this icon at the top right of your browser bar.

4.  To turn off Private Browsing, click the “PRIVATE” button.  Alternatively, you can uncheck Private Browsing in the Safari menu.

Aseem Kishore pointed out a flaw in Safari’s Private Browsing mode:  even when you use it, anyone with access to your Mac can get a list of the site’s you’ve visited using a Terminal command.  Read his article here to learn how to clear those entries yourself.

Enabling Do Not Track

Safari 5.1 is the first version of Safari to support Do Not Track.  Click here to download it if you don’t have it yet.  We’ll wait.

Now, here’s how you enable Do Not Track.  We were a little surprised at how hard it was to figure out:

1.  Go to the Safari menu, then click “Preferences.”

2.  Go to the “Advanced” tab on the right.  It looks like a gear.

3.  Check the box next to “Show Develop menu in menu bar.”

Click the box next to "Show Develop menu in menu bar"

4.  Close out of Preferences.  You should now see a new menu, “Develop,” at the top of your screen between “Bookmarks” and “Window.”

5.  Click the new “Develop” menu, then click “Send Do Not Track HTTP Header.”  You should see a check mark next to it when you’re done.

The final step in enabling Do Not Track in Safari 5.1.

Getting privacy in Internet Explorer

Enabling InPrivate

In IE 9, follow these steps to turn on InPrivate, Microsoft’s private browsing mode:

1.  With an IE window open, click on the “Safety” menu, then click “InPrivate Browsing.”  Alternatively, you can use the shortcut Ctrl + Shift + P.

How to turn on InPrivate.

2.  You’ll see a message telling you that you’re in InPrivate mode.

This box will confirm that you've entered InPrivate.

3.  To stop using InPrivate, close your window.

Enabling Do Not Track

Internet Explorer supports Do Not Track through Tracking Protection Lists (TPLs for short).  TPLs block content from sites that appear on the list.  Once a user downloads a TPL, it’s automatically updated.  Microsoft offers four sponsored lists maintained by Abine, EasyList, PrivacyChoice, and TRUSTe.

Contrary to what you might think, installing more TPLs won’t necessarily give you more protection.  Because TRUSTe’s list actually allows a great deal of content, enabling the TRUSTe TPL alongside any other TPL will negate the protective effect of the second TPL in many cases.  Read more about why more tracking protection isn’t always better.

Here’s how to enable Tracking Protection in IE:

1.  With an IE window open, click the “Tools” button (it has a gear icon on it), point to “Safety,” and then click “Tracking Protection.”

Installing TPLs

2.  In the Manage Add-On box that pops up, select “Your Personalized list” and then click “Enable.”  This installs a list based on your browsing history.

3.  To change, manage, or add lists, open Tracking Protection and click the link that reads “Get a Tracking Protection List online.”  Alternatively, you can visit Microsoft’s TPL page here.

Microsoft's list of 4 trusted TPL providers.

Getting privacy in Firefox

Enabling private browsing

1.  With a Firefox window open, click the “Tools” menu, then click “Start Private Browsing.”

Click "Start Private Browsing."

2.  A confirmation box will pop up.  Click the “Start Private Browsing” button to begin.

Click "Start Private Browsing."

3.  A new window will open that says (Private Browsing) on the top with a purple masquerade mask.

How your new private browsing window will appear in Firefox.

4.  To turn off private browsing, click the “Tools” menu, then click “Stop Private Browsing.”

To exit private browsing.

Enabling Do Not Track

Of all the browsers, Firefox has the simplest Do Not Track feature.  Here’s how to turn it on:

1.  With a Firefox window open, click on the “Firefox” menu, then “Preferences.”

2.  With the preferences box open, click on the “Privacy” tab.  It looks like a purple masquerade mask.

3.  Check the box next to “Tell web sites I do not want to be tracked.”

How Do Not Track appears in Firefox.

4.  To disable Do Not Track, uncheck this box.

As we discussed when talking about Google Chrome above, Firefox’s Do Not Track header isn’t mandatory and most sites don’t listen to it.  For added protection against tracking in Firefox, try a privacy add-on like Do Not Track Plus.

 


We hope you found this guide helpful.  Are you satisfied with the privacy options your browser offers?  Why or why not?  What would you like to see to feel more protected?  Did we miss something that you think we should include?  Let us know by leaving a comment below.

50 cents for your MySpace profile: What will happen to your data now?

June 29th, 2011

Welcome to a world where your online identity, and a lot about your personal life, goes around and around to the highest bidder.

If you’re one of the 70 million people who used Myspace.com, your profile now belongs to the targeted advertising network that bought them on June 29, 2011, Specific Media.   If you don’t know much about Ad Networks and how they use your information, click here.  The system of advertising networks, however, and the reason they’re called “networks,” is that they share information about your online life across many many sites to build up a more specific profile of you, your habits, and your likelihood to respond to various marketers and advertisers and other paying customers.

Specific Media: the ad network that bought MySpace.

So Specific Media owns your Myspace digital identity, period.  This is a situation you ought to be familiar with:  we’ll all deal with it in the future as companies that have been giving you free services try to make money from your activity.  This is Econ 101.

You can’t erase it.

You don’t control it.

You don’t, in fact, have any rights to “you:”  what you’ve done, what you’ve posted, and who you are (or were in the case of many of us) in our online lives.  Ask yourself a few key questions:

1. Was I on Myspace?

2. Were my pictures, relationship status, wall posts, or sexual orientation part of my profile?

3. What friends was I connected to there, and how many friends were they connected to?

4. Did I bother to ever remove information from Myspace or to delete my account?

According to the media reports, your profile was worth about $.50.

What can you do about it?  Delete your MySpace account if you haven’t already, and start cleaning out the cookies and blocking ad networks like Specific Media.  It’s not a hassle if you use the right tools, like  TACO 4 (Targeted Advertising Cookie Opt Out).  In fact, it can even speed up your  web browsing and make it more convenient.

Getting from PrivacyVille to the Real World of Online Privacy

July 8th, 2011

Zynga, creator of Farmville and Words With Friends, seems to have done the impossible:  it made privacy policies fun.  With its new game PrivacyVille, Zynga turned the chore of reading privacy policies into a game.

The incentive for playing?  200 zPoints, Zynga’s currency, which users get from playing any of Zynga’s games.  Because there’s an 80-zPoint cap per game per day, 200 is a pretty good deal.  And that’s why this system works:  it makes learning about privacy valuable.  It gives people a reason to pay attention.

PrivacyVille teaches players about important online privacy concepts, like targeted advertising.

How Zynga Tracks Its Users

Authorizing their apps on social networks like Facebook lets both Zynga and their advertisers track you.  For example, when you’re playing the free version of Words With Friends, you’ll see an ad pop up after every move you make.  The advertisers paying to show you those ads also pay for information about you.  What do they know about you through tracking?  A lot, including the following:

    • What pages you visited, and in what order
    • What you clicked and how many times
    • How long you spent on each page
    • The page you were viewing before you came to play, and the page you left the game to visit
    • Which browser you’re using
    • The zip code in which you’re accessing the internet
    • What you buy
    • Your Facebook profile information, including your friends

Based on what they learn about you through tracking, they’ll tweak the ads you see to try to make them more appealing to you (in other words, make you more likely to buy).  They track you using cookies, web bugs, and tracking pixels.  You can stop tracking of your online activity and targeted advertisements with free software like TACO, or get even more privacy with PrivacySuite.

PrivacyVille:  Our Review

We played PrivacyVille to give you the rundown:

  • Length
      • Very short.  You can get through it in about 5 minutes if you’re an average reader.
  • Structure
      • There are two parts:  in the first, you click through the town of PrivacyVille and read about various concepts, like how Zynga uses your email address and where it stores your data.  In the second part, you have to answer a five-question quiz based on the content you read.  Answering them correctly unlocks your 200 zPoint reward.
  • Difficulty
      • Super easy.  PrivacyVille explains complex privacy concepts like behavioral advertising and data storage in a simple way, and the questions they ask during the quiz are incredibly easy.
  • Overall value as an educational tool
      • We love the interactivity, creativity, and goal behind PrivacyVille and commend Zynga for it.  It’s quite a step forward for privacy.  It’s still flawed, though.  The quiz is too easy:  three of the four answer choices are so obviously incorrect that anyone could choose the correct answer without having paid attention in the learning segment.  For example, here’s an actual Q&A set from PrivacyVille:
Zynga privacyville example question

Is it...the English countryside?

    • It doesn’t take any understanding of privacy to answer this question.  In practice, anyone could click through the reading in a flash, choose the correct answer based purely on how obviously wrong the others are, and collect his or her points in minutes.  We hope that people actually pay attention, but realistically, many won’t.

Why Privacy Protection Is Better Than Privacy Policies

Let’s face it:  most of us don’t read privacy policies.  They’re long and boring, and even if we did feel like putting in the time to read them, they don’t make sense to anyone without a law degree.  But we’re shooting ourselves in the foot when we hastily click “I agree” without having a clue what we’re agreeing to.

It’s in our best interests to understand them, though:  it’s the only way we’ll know the privacy risks we take when we sign up for a site or use a service.  Companies have struggled with this issue for as long as privacy policies have existed:  how do they get people to care?

One compromise we’ve been seeing more often is the 2-column approach:  put the confusing legalese on the left side; put a common-sense translation on the right.  Still, you’re forcing people to read dense stuff, and internet users, with our unique form of internet-induced attention deficit disorder, won’t pay attention.

An example of a 2-column Terms of Use page: legalese is on the left; normal English is on the right. From Aviary.com.

Zynga’s solution of making it a game is an inspired step in the right direction.  Sure, it’s not the most fun game in the world, but it’s far more interactive and engaging than any other privacy policy we’ve seen, and we hope to see more like it.

At the end of the quiz, you can collect your reward: 200 zPoints.

 

Played PrivacyVille?  Do you think it’s an effective way of helping people understand Zynga’s privacy policy?  Let us know by leaving your comment below.

Your Age Is Common Knowledge on the Internet

July 26th, 2011

If you’re browsing without blocking tracking, you’re telling the world how old you are.

Let’s say you’re applying for jobs.  Most hiring managers who want to steer clear of age discrimination won’t directly ask you how old you are (unless they’re checking that you’re over a minimum age requirement).  Or maybe you’re not comfortable with a date knowing your real age.  But because all of your personal info is publicly available online, they don’t need to ask you anymore:  all they have to do is Google you.

Don’t believe us?  Try it right now:  search for yourself on Spokeo, BeenVerified, MyLife, or Intelius.

Or try Googling your age by doing this:  [in quotes, "First Name, Middle Initial, Last Name" +"age"].

Use the format above to search for yourself.

You found your age, didn’t you?  And you probably found much more than that:  your full name, aliases or maiden names, current address, past addresses, phone numbers, family members, and more.

One of the ways that these websites and advertisers get this information is, believe it or not, you. 

If you’re browsing the web without blocking tracking, you’re broadcasting a lot of information about yourself, including what you buy, where you live, which sites you visit, and for how long.  Pair this information with visitor demographic data—such as age, gender, and ZIP code–and voila:  advertisers can build a scarily accurate profile for you, which they then use to target you with specific ads.

If you're not blocking online tracking, it can reveal a lot about you.

This type of advertising, called behavioral advertising or tracking, is only getting more popular.  The US market alone is predicted to grow to $4.4 billion by 2012.  Your data is worth a lot of money to advertisers, and they’re willing to pay for it.

Thankfully, you can take matters into your own hands and block secret tracking of what you do online.  Meanwhile, tracking remains a hotly contested issue in Congress, and we hope to see a privacy-enhancing set of guidelines soon.  If the way they seem to be handling the budget is any indication, you’re better off not waiting around for the government to protect you:  do it yourself.

 

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s PrivacySuite products and DeleteMe privacy subscription services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.  For more information, please visit www.abine.com.

Is Google+ being “privacy evil”?

July 25th, 2011

Google+'s real name policy has users worried about their privacy.

If we thought Google+ vs Facebook was about competing to enhance control over your online privacy, maybe we need to think again.

Over the last 96 hours or so, there have been a lot of reports of Google enforcing its policy (oh-so-cleverly named “community standards”) that users of G+ need to use their real name.

Specifically, Google+’s policy requires that your display name be what your “friends, family, and coworkers” call you.

This is similar to Facebook’s sinister “real name” policy, which would be evil if it were well-enforced, and which we blogged about extensively last year.  In the post, we joked about the concept of Google requiring your identity for search like Facebook did:

“To use Google Search, you’ll need to sign in under your one true identity. If this is in direct contrast to what you expected from an internet search engine, we apologize for any confusion. This is simply the intention behind our service. You can no longer search with Google. This decision is final.”  – http://www.abine.com/wordpress/2010/facebooks-iron-fist/

Well, the joke’s on us.

As Robert Scoble and Violet Blue report, Google+ is, like Facebook, pushing to require your real identity to use their services.  In some cases, it appears that if users want to use a simple alias in place of their name, all of their Google services access will be revoked.  Is this crazy, or just the anti-privacy road that lies ahead?

Vic Gundotra of Google was quoted as saying:

“It is about having common names and removing people who spell their names in weird ways, like using upside-down characters, or who are using obviously fake names.”

Wow.  No one should use an obviously fake name on the Internet now?   Our PrivacySuite browser add-on is built on this concept: our right to choose identities we’re comfortable with on a site-by-site basis and then creating, if desired, obviously fake identities.

Our PrivacySuite encourages you to use aliases, pseudonyms, and other alternative identities online.

In a world where both Facebook and Google are busy subsidizing the development of  “who you are as a user” (in industry jargon, “identity management”) on millions of other sites you visit, giving yourself up might mean only saying and doing things online that you’d do in front of your grandmother.   We’re quite sure that Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Paige think this would make a better business, but would it make a better Web?

About Abine:  Abine, Inc. The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s PrivacySuite products and DeleteMe privacy subscription services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.  For more information, please visit www.abine.com.

Spreading the word on removing yourself from background check sites: Part 1

August 3rd, 2011

The following was written by Sarah Downey, an attorney and privacy analyst at Abine.

Proving once again that reddit is the best site ever.

A week ago, I posted a reddit thread as LawyerCT on how to remove yourself from the background check site BeenVerified, as well as a few others.  I was sick of people search websites making it hard for people to delete themselves, so I figured I’d share my tips and ask the reddit community to spread the word.  And spread the word they did.  The user Pibbman added to what I had started to create a second thread, titled “HOW TO:  Remove yourself from ALL background check websites.  Thanks to LawyerCT.“  It made it to the front page of reddit, and since then it’s been popping up everywhere, including a LifeHacker article by Melanie Pinola.  I’m thrilled to raise awareness of a major privacy issue, and I’m including the same info on our privacy blog at Abine to help the cause.

A little background on myself:  my name is Sarah, and I’m a DeleteMe expert here at Abine.  I’m an attorney and a privacy advocate, and I spend a lot of time deleting people’s contact information from people search websites like MyLife, Intelius, and Spokeo.

As a result of doing all these opt-outs, I’ve become good at digging through long Terms of Use, privacy policies, and contact forms to find how to delete yourself.  I’m convinced that many of these companies try to make it difficult to remove listings; after all, your data is their lifeblood.

But I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with these sites.  They get your information through public record sources, like birth certificates, real estate purchase and sale records, lawsuits, and marriage licenses–for free–and then they stockpile it, post it for the world to see, and sell it.  They argue that they’re simply reposting public record info that already exists for anyone to access, but I disagree.  They’re doing something completely different:  they’re making all of our contact info more visible and more accessible than ever before.  It’s not public record anymore; it’s super public.  There’s a big difference between A), physically walking down to a courthouse and asking for a copy of a legal filing so you can find someone’s name and address from it, and B), Googling it from your couch.

New technology has made public record info far more visible and accessible than ever before, making it something else entirely.

I hear from people with stalkers, a history of domestic abuse, a vindictive ex, or just a general interest in staying private.  Having their contact information so readily available isn’t just annoying; it’s dangerous.  Getting it removed shouldn’t be as confusing and time-consuming as it currently is.

Lawmakers need to recognize that the super-public nature of these people search sites has strayed too far from our original concept of “public record,” and everything needs to be opt-in by default.  If these companies want to profit off the facts that makes us who we are–our names, ages, birth dates, addresses, and family members–we should have a say in that.  And if we decide that it’s okay, we should see a cut of that profit.  At the very least, these sites should have one uniform, simple, clearly-displayed opt-out method.

But until this happens, the burden is on us to play cat-and-mouse with these companies:  we follow their convoluted rules and delete ourselves; they try to find us again.  DeleteMe will do it for you if you want to save yourself the time, but if you’d rather do it yourself, see below for full instructions.  Using privacy apps in your browser that prevent tracking and let you use alias emails, like TACO and PrivacySuite, will also help safeguard your information.  And if keeping your contact information private is important to you, please keep spreading the word to anyone you care about.

In Part 2, I’ll discuss how these companies get your information in the first place, what you can do about it, and how you can better protect yourself.

And without further ado, here is Pibbman’s reddit post:

Thanks to LawyerCT for bringing this topic up on /r/technology. She also provided a list of the top sites online that hold data on you.

I decided to go ahead and use this list to collect removal procedures from ALL of these websites and provide direct links or instructions to do so.

The following list was provided as being the “big boys”, so if you remove your name from these ones then all the smaller “sites” should fall afterwards.

  • Intelius.com
  • Acxiom.com
  • MyLife.com
  • ZabaSearch.com
  • Spoke.com
  • BeenVerified.com
  • PeekYou.com
  • USSearch.com
  • PeopleFinders.com
  • PeopleLookup.com
  • PeopleSmart.com
  • PrivateEye.com
  • WhitePages.com
  • USA-People-Search.com
  • Spokeo.com
  • PublicRecordsNow.com
  • DOBSearch.com
  • Radaris.com

How to remove yourself from each of these have been listed below. I would recommend that you scan some form of ID such as a state issued ID like a drivers license. Black out your picture and drivers number. Leaving your name, address and DOB visible. Any sites that requires such a thing will have an * after the address.


Intelius.com* – Opt-out

Acxiom.comOpt-out

MyLife.com – To request that a Member Profile or Public Profile be deleted, please contact Customer Care at 1-888-704-1900 or contact us by email at privacy@mylife.com. Upon receipt of these requests, and confirmation that you are requesting that your own profile be removed, please allow MyLife 10 business days to complete this removal. It may be necessary to contact you to validate that you are the profile owner requesting the removal. This is to ensure the correct identity and profile ownership before completing these requests, and is for the protection of our users and their privacy.

Zabasearch.com* – Opt-out

Spokeo.comOpt-out

BeenVerified.comLawyerCT’s guide

Peekyou.comOpt-Out

USSearch.com* – Opt-Out

PeopleFinders.comOpt-Out: Annoying form you have to mail in

PeopleLookup.com* – In order for PeopleLookup to suppress or opt out your personal information from appearing on our Website, we need to verify your identity. To do this, we require faxed proof of identity. Proof of identity can be a state issued ID card or driver’s license. If you are faxing a copy of your driver’s license, we require that you cross out the photo and the driver’s license number. We only need to see the name, address and date of birth. We will only use this information to process your opt out request. Please fax to 425-974-6194 and allow 4 to 6 weeks to process your request.

PeopleSmart.comOpt-Out

PrivateEye.comOpt-Out

Whitepages.comOpt-Out

USA-People-Search.comOpt-Out: Yet another form to mail in

Spoke.comScroll Down to Access and Correction Section for more info

PublicRecordsNow.com – Still determining how to remove…

DOBSearch.com* – In order for us to “opt out” your public information from being viewable on the public DOBsearch People Finder search results, we need to verify your identity and require faxed proof of identity. Proof of identity can be a state issued ID card or driver’s license, or notarized letter. If you are faxing a copy of your driver’s license, you may cross out the photo and the driver’s license number. We only need to see the name, address and date of birth. Please fax to 516-717-3017 and allow 4 to 6 weeks to completely process your request. It is your responsibility to ensure legibility of your document

Radaris.comOpt-Out; Thanks to those who figured it out.

This pretty much sums up how we feel about people search sites:

August 26th, 2011

You seriously make people send two letters to the same place just to remove their information from your sites?

Is privacy dead or a billion-dollar business?

August 29th, 2011

Please help us out and vote for our SXSW panel, “Is privacy dead or a billion-dollar business?”  Your votes make up 30% of the decision process, so we really need you!  We’ll warn you that you need an account on SXSW.com to vote, but registering with a disposable email using our PrivacySuite makes that as painless as possible.  (Curious about how disposable email, also known as alias or anonymous email, works?  Read our blog post about it.)

Voting ends on September 2nd, 2011.

In case you aren’t familiar with SXSW, which stands for South by Southwest, it’s a set of conferences and festivals that take place every spring in Austin, Texas.  Events fall into 3 categories:  film, music, and interactive.  We fall into the “interactive” part.

Our CEO, Bill Kerrigan, will be on a panel with Shaun Dakin of PrivacyCamp and Webbmedia, Denise Taylo of Privo, Shane Green of Personal.com, and Noah Lang of Reputation.com.  The panelists will discuss companies that are innovating around personal data privacy, including business models that are making money and helping consumers manage their data and privacy.  In other words, you don’t have to–and you shouldn’t–sell out your customers’ privacy in order to profit.

We’d be honored to speak at SXSW with such a talented group of our fellow privacy innovators, so we appreciate you taking a moment to vote for us!

MyLife.com sued for deception: Were you duped?

September 6th, 2011

“Who’s searching for you?”  MyLife.com asks this question to every visitor of its site, and according to a lawsuit filed in California on February 3, 2011, it lies about the answer.  For example, one victim cited in the complaint allegedly registered as “sfsf sdgfsdgs,” then received an email from MyLife.com saying that seven people were searching for “sfsf sdgfsdgs.”  Maybe this wouldn’t have raised any eyebrows if people were naming their kids “sfsf sdgfsdgs,” but something tells us they aren’t.  Some celebrity baby names are pretty close in their weirdness, though.

Who's searching for you? Apparently no one, according to the lawsuit against MyLife.com.

Interesting (and perhaps surprisingly to those of you who haven’t realized yet that Google isn’t as pro-privacy as you thought), Google allows these types of ads on its search pages.  People search sites can–and do–bid on names as keywords.  Forbes’ Kashmir Hill wrote about this earlier this month:

Earlier this year, I noted that a background check company named Intelius had placed a Google ad on a search of my name. “We found Kashmir Hill,” it promised . . . [But] [t]he new policy makes clear that Google doesn’t care who places an ad on your name.

Seems like Intelius uses a similar, but slightly less aggressive, tactic as MyLife.

An example of a sponsored ad that Intelius runs on real name keywords.

Users who are tempted to find out the mystery person searching for them can pay a low trial fee, $7.95, to unveil the secret.  At least they think it’s $7.95.  Suddenly they’re charged “roughly $90 to $190″ and billed every month thereafter.  The complaint says that this deceptive practice happens so often that Visa and American Express have”designated MyLife as a frequent offender whose charges are inherently suspect.”

The complaint included the above illustration to show MyLife's shady business practices.

The complaint also alleges that “[v]ictims of the ruse then find that MyLife hacks into their address books to target their friends, family and other contacts with spam solicitations stating that ‘someone’ is looking for them.” You read correctly:  not only does MyLife.com overcharge you with hidden fees and pretend that people are searching for you when they’re not, but they spam your contacts list, too.  According to the complaint, “This starts the cycle anew by priming the pump with a fresh crop of victims that MyLife tricks with false solicitations, overbills, and hacks.”

The plaintiffs allege violations of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act and the Unfair Competition Law and seek to attain class action certification.  We’ll keep you posted on whether that succeeds.  If you were one of the people duped, you may be compensated for what happened to you.

MyLife.com is part of a network of sites:  it used to be Reunion.com, it shares a database with Wink.com, and it’s affiliated with Classmates.com, which is now MemoryLane.com.  Facing similar charges of deception in 2010, Classmates.com settled for $9.5 million.  Still, that amount is an afterthought to a company that boasted in November 2010 that it is now registering more U.S. users per month than both LinkedIn and Twitter.

How Abine sees MyLife and User Privacy

We have our own qualms with MyLife here at Abine.  First, they’re a major pain to remove people from:  they’re the only major people search website that requires that you call them to delete your listing.  (Check out our opt-out page to learn how to remove yourself from MyLife, as well as many other big people search databases).

Second, they continually republish listings that we’ve already deleted.  They carefully choose their words when we call, making sure to keep calling them “public record listings.”  “Oh, I see a LinkedIn profile and a Facebook profile,” they’ll say, as if it’s common sense that your social networking information will be scraped and aggregated and sold on a completely different website to strangers.  Sometimes we’ll remove a “standard” listing, only to find several new ones pop up from these “public records.”  Call us old-fashioned, but when we take the time to call you up and request that you delete a listing, we expect it’ll be gone forever.

We will say this about MyLife, though:  the people who answer their phones are extraordinarily friendly.  We know they’re just doing their jobs and they’re not the problem, and they do a damn good job at customer service.  Hopefully they’ll be able to find other uses of their people skills when MyLife goes down in flames.  Fingers crossed.

As much as we dislike MyLife.com, their customer service people are awesome. We imagine they actually look like these people.

Have you had an experience with MyLife.com?  Good?  Bad?  Let us know in the comments section below.

[INFOGRAPHIC] How people search websites (AKA data brokers) get your information

September 6th, 2011

Click the image below to see the full infographic:

Click the preview image above to see the full infographic.

How to Turn on Do Not Track in Your Browser

September 7th, 2011

Want to learn how to turn on Do Not Track in whichever browser you’re using?  You’ve come to the right place.

Note: for more comprehensive help on enabling all pro-privacy features in your browser, check out our previous guide.

First Things First:  What is Do Not Track?

“Tracking” refers to the many different methods that websites, advertisers, ad networks, and others use to learn about your web browsing behavior.  This includes information about what sites you visit and for how long; things you like, dislike, and comment on; what you search for; and what you buy.  They then share this information across the web to show you ads, products, or services specifically targeted to you.

Here’s an example:  after you search for “Texas barbeque” in Google, you start seeing ads for Dallas restaurants and Lone Star State barbeque contests on all the pages you visit.  Your search told the advertising networks that you’re at least somewhat interested in Texas bbq, and now they’ll follow you around the web throwing related ads at you.

We imagine that ad networks have a secret underground lair like this one.

Although there are a few ways of blocking targeted advertising, the browsers do it with what’s called a Do Not Track header.  Think of it like this: when you visit a website, your browser waves around a little flag–the Do Not Track header–as soon as it arrives.  That flag tells the website, its advertisers, and other content providers that you don’t want to be tracked.  In theory, everyone who sees this flag will react to it by not targeting ads to you.  Although you’ll still see ads, they’ll be anonymous:  they won’t be targeted to appeal to you.

How the Do Not Track header works...in theory, at least.

The Problem with Do Not Track

Here’s the catch:  websites don’t have to honor this message.  Following the Do Not Track order is completely voluntary.  Today, 99% of sites don’t do anything about Do Not Track.  And it’s not because of effort:  The Associated Press, the first major web service to follow the Do Not Track header, reported that “it only took a few hours for one engineer to implement.”

We’re hopeful that more sites will honor the Do Not Track header in the future, but for now, there’s no harm in enabling it.

Why Do Not Track Plus is Better

We offer more than the “wait and see” approach of the Do Not Track header.  Instead of passively asking websites to “please don’t track me” and hoping they’ll listen, we actively disable ad networks and web bugs from tracking you.  We block your browser from even requesting targeted ads from advertisers.  The ad networks won’t even know you’re there at all.

Do Not Track Plus actually BLOCKS ads; we don't just ask them nicely to go away.

Here’s an example:  normally, when you go to CNN.com, your browser makes many requests to different ad networks for loading ads and javascript, setting tracking cookies, and more.  Do Not Track Plus detects these requests and blocks them so that they’re never made.

In sum, we don’t rely on just the Do Not Track header.  We still send it as a precautionary measure, but we do much more to protect your privacy.  Intrigued?  Try Do Not Track Plus for free.

Now that you understand the basics (and the limitations) of browser Do Not Track, we’ll tell you how to start using it.

Enabling Do Not Track in Apple Safari

Safari 5.1 is the first version of Safari to support Do Not Track.  Click here to download it if you don’t have it yet.  We’ll wait.

Now, here’s how you enable Do Not Track.  We were a little surprised at how hard it was to figure out:

1.  Go to the Safari menu, then click “Preferences.”

2.  Go to the “Advanced” tab on the right.  It looks like a gear.

3.  Check the box next to “Show Develop menu in menu bar.”

Click the box next to "Show Develop menu in menu bar"

4.  Close out of Preferences.  You should now see a new menu, “Develop,” at the top of your screen between “Bookmarks” and “Window.”

5.  Click the new “Develop” menu, then click “Send Do Not Track HTTP Header.”  You should see a check mark next to it when you’re done.

The final step in enabling Do Not Track in Safari.

Enabling Do Not Track in Google Chrome

Google has held out against Do Not Track, instead releasing an extension called Keep My Opt-Outs.  Google bills it as “a one-step, persistent opt-out of personalized advertising and related data tracking.”  Keep My Opt Outs works by installing opt-out cookies on your computer.  These are “good,” site-specific cookies that prevent a corresponding site from installing future cookies.

The downsides to Keep My Opt Outs?  First, you have to install an extension rather than simply changing your browser settings.  Second, Keep My Opt Outs doesn’t actually block any tracking and advertising networks.  Their cookies still allow the networks to store, collect, analyze, and use data about you; they’re only swearing that they won’t show you a targeted ad on that site.  To read more about privacy in Google Chrome, check out Google’s “Overview of privacy settings” page.

To install Keep My Opt Outs:

1.  Visit the Chrome web store.

2.  Click the blue “Install” button.

Installing Google's Keep My Opt Outs extension

3.  You’ll receive a yellow notification saying that “Keep My Opt Outs is now installed.”

This bar will confirm that you've installed the extension.

4.  To manage Keep My Opt Outs and other installed extensions, click the “Window” menu, then click “Extensions.”

Your list of Chrome extensions will look something like this

5.  In the extensions window, you can disable, uninstall, or choose to allow the extension to run while you’re in incognito mode.

Enabling Do Not Track in Microsoft Internet Explorer

Internet Explorer supports Do Not Track through Tracking Protection Lists (TPLs for short).  TPLs block content from sites that appear on the list.  Once a user downloads a TPL, it’s automatically updated.  Microsoft offers four sponsored lists maintained by Abine, EasyList, PrivacyChoice, and TRUSTe.

Contrary to what you might think, installing more TPLs won’t necessarily give you more protection.  Because TRUSTe’s list actually allows a great deal of content, enabling the TRUSTe TPL alongside any other TPL will negate the protective effect of the second TPL in many cases.  Read more about why more tracking protection isn’t always better.

Here’s how to enable Tracking Protection in IE:

1.  With an IE window open, click the “Tools” button (it has a gear icon on it), point to “Safety,” and then click “Tracking Protection.”

Installing TPLs

2.  In the Manage Add-On box that pops up, select “Your Personalized list” and then click “Enable.”  This installs a list based on your browsing history.

3.  To change, manage, or add lists, open Tracking Protection and click the link that reads “Get a Tracking Protection List online.”  Alternatively, you can visit Microsoft’s TPL page here.

Microsoft's list of 4 trusted TPL providers

Enabling Do Not Track in Mozilla Firefox

Of all the browsers, Firefox has the simplest Do Not Track feature.  Here’s how to turn it on:

1.  With a Firefox window open, click on the “Firefox” menu, then “Preferences.”

2.  With the preferences box open, click on the “Privacy” tab.  It looks like a purple masquerade mask.

3.  Check the box next to “Tell web sites I do not want to be tracked.”

How Do Not Track appears in Firefox

4.  To disable Do Not Track, uncheck this box.

As we discussed when talking about Google Chrome above, Firefox’s Do Not Track header isn’t mandatory and most sites don’t listen to it.  For added protection against tracking in Firefox, try a privacy add-on like Do Not Track Plus.

 


We hope you found this guide helpful.  Are you satisfied with the privacy options your browser offers?  Why or why not?  What would you like to see to feel more protected?  Did we miss anything that you think we should include?  Let us know by leaving a comment below.

5 new Facebook photo changes you need to make to protect your privacy

September 15th, 2011

A picture’s worth a thousand words, and a damaging, embarrassing, or scandalous Facebook picture can be a career-ender (not to mention a personal nightmare).  Just look at the case of Ashley Payne, a teacher who was fired after her employers found photos of her holding beers on Facebook.  Although Facebook overhauled all of its privacy settings in August 2011, we’re focusing only on photos.  Here’s what you need to know to save yourself from a future Facebook photo firestorm.

1.  Use the new detagging features

Detagging just got a lot more complicated, but you can use it to your advantage.  Instead of merely detagging like you did under the old privacy settings, detagging now has multiple steps:  it combines reporting violations with detagging.

Detagging isn't just one step anymore.

But let’s keep it simple and tell you what to do if you just want to detag a photo of you.  First, go to the photo you want to detag and click the “remove” link.  The window above will pop up.  Then select “I want to remove this tag,” then hit the “continue” button.

And if you’ve never gone through all of your tagged photos to detag the bad ones, now’s the time.  Get to it!

2.  Ask taggers to take photos down

Facebook’s new photo privacy settings now allow you to do more than detag:  you can–in theory, at least–get the person who posted it to take it down.  As you can see in our screenshot below, you can now click a button to “Ask [the poster] to take the photo down:”

Once you choose to detag, Facebook now offers you new privacy options.

Don’t get too excited:  this feature is just a roundabout way of making you directly message the person who posted it and asking him or her to remove it.  Seriously.  Clicking the button just opens a Facebook message window that’s pre-addressed to the photo poster.

It looks like Facebook is trying to privatize photo takedowns with this option.  After all, their notoriously unhelpful compliance department is being inundated by thousands of reports of abusive content each day and can’t seem to keep up.  Forcing users to deal with each other, rather than the Facebook middleman, looks like an attempt to shirk some of their work.

3.  Turn off tag suggestions

After a privacy backlash, Facebook renamed its facial recognition software the friendlier “tag suggestions” to avoid scaring users away.  But don’t be fooled:  tag suggestions are facial recognition.  In Facebook’s own words, “If a friend uploads a photo that looks like you, we’ll suggest adding a tag of you.”  See below:

Facebook's tag suggestions window.

Protect yourself by turning tag suggestions off.  Go to “Account,” then “Privacy Settings,” then “How Tags Work,” and make sure tag suggestions are set to “off.”

You can change your photo privacy preferences in the "How Tags Work" window.

4.  Turn on tag review

Would you rather A), let anyone (anyone, not just your friends) tag you in any photo without your approval; or B), be able to look tags over before they’re posted to your profile?  If you care at all about privacy, B is your answer.  And yes, anyone can tag you now.  Facebook quietly slipped in this tag free-for-all alongside tag review.

With tag review enabled, you’ll start receiving tag notices.  You’ll see them on your home feed as to-do’s, just like pending friend requests, messages, and comments.  You can then review pending tags and choose whether to approve them by hitting the check mark next to the item:

How a pending tag appears in Facebook.

Protect yourself by turning tag review on.  Go to “Privacy Settings,” then “How Tags Work,” and make sure tag review is set to “on.”

Make sure tag review is enabled.

5.  Use the new method of abuse reporting

If all else fails and you find yourself having to complain to the Facebook authority, at least they’ve made it easier to do so.  Clicking “remove” under a photo now brings up both the detagging and reporting options:

Detag or report, all in one place.

You can pick from five types of Terms of Use violations:  spam or scam, nudity or pornography, graphic violence, hate speech or symbol, or illegal drug use.  They don’t list copyright infringement here for some reason, but you can report those violations to Facebook here.  Note that “this picture makes me look awful” is not a reason for reporting it.

Of course, there are horror stories of users reporting serious violations and never receiving a response from Facebook, so the odds aren’t in your favor.  Just read some of the comments on Facebook employee Jessica Ghastin’s blog post, “Responding to Abuse Reports More Effectively.

The moral of the story?  It’s better to screen content before it’s posted than try to remove it afterwards.  Here’s a quick summary:

  • Before a photo is posted:  Use tag review, turn off tag suggestions, and be careful about what you post
  • After a photo is posted:  Detag, request that posters remove photos, and report violations to Facebook

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s PrivacySuite products and DeleteMe privacy subscription services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.  For more information, please visit www.abine.com.

Announcing a new privacy feature: social button blocking

September 23rd, 2011

We’re excited to unveil a new privacy feature:  social button blocking.  Why block them?  Read our post about how social buttons, like Google’s +1 and Facebook’s Like, track you even if you never click them.

Social buttons are a tracking system.

We realize that people want to share things:  it’s a big part of what we do online, and it’s fun.  We just want sharing to be consensual.  Our social button blocking feature gives you a choice:  unblock social sites to share things with your friends, or keep them blocked to protect your privacy.

If you want to share something on a site, all you have to do is click a social button just like you normally would.  Our software will then enable sharing (and thus tracking) for that button on that particular site. Click again to share.  It’s that simple.

We’re rolling out the feature in PrivacySuite, Do Not Track Plus, and TACO over the next few weeks.

How it works:

Social sites will show up in your privacy alert window just like ad networks, tracking sites, and cookies already do:

We've incorporated tracking done by social networks into our privacy add-ons.

They’ll be counted as trackers and included in the tracker number you see on your privacy alert icon.  A green icon means you’re blocking all tracking; a gray icon means you’re only blocking some trackers; and a red crossed-out icon means you’ve disabled the add-on on that particular site:

The privacy alert icon keeps a running count of the number of trackers on each site you visit. Green means you're protected

Let’s say you want to share something with a Facebook “Like” button.  Simply click the button, and you’ll see that Facebook is enabled on that site.  The privacy alert window will also reflect this change and warn you that Facebook is now tracking your visits.  Remember:  there’s no sharing without tracking!

Now you'll be able to Like things on this page. Note that the privacy alert icon is now gray to indicate that you're not fully protected against tracking.

The most important point about our social button blocking:  it stops the buttons from sharing your information BEFORE you click on them.  You can still click, but now you have a choice.  And at Abine, we’re all about giving users the choice to protect their privacy.

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.

In ironic news, background check website Intelius launches TrueRep privacy service

September 28th, 2011

Updated 10/11/2011:  Although TrueRep does have paid features, we’ve learned that it’s free to suppress your data from appearing on Intelius and three of its partner sites.  Suppression is limited to your two most recent addresses and one phone number, and it doesn’t extend to Intelius’s other partner and affiliate sites, such as Zabasearch, PeopleLookUp, and USSearch.

Intelius, which collects and sells your data, recently launched a new company called TrueRep that you pay to, among other online reputation services, view your own data.  Take a second to wrap your head around that.

So the people that can "protect" your data are also the ones...selling it?

We’ll break it down for you:

1.  Intelius collects your personal information from various sources, including social networking sites, public records, and powerhouse data collectors like Acxiom.

2.  Intelius sells your personal information to anyone who wants it on its network of background check sites, which includes Zabasearch, USSearch, PeopleLookUp, LookUpAnyone.com, and PublicRecords.com

3.  If you pay for a subscription to TrueRep, Intelius will then let you manage the way your information appears on its network of sites.

They worsen your privacy problem; you go to them to fix it.  Does that make sense?

And here’s the icing on the cake:  you’re required to log in with your Facebook account.

Our twitter conversation about this with Intelius's Chief Privacy Officer, Jim Adler.

That’s right:  it’s like the Spotify controversy, but with a whole other layer of privacy problems.  TrueRep explains,

TrueRep protects you from others who may want to claim your identity.  Therefore, it is required that you verify your identity through signing in to your Facebook account.

(emphasis in original).

First of all, it’s a total non-sequitur to say that having a Facebook account is at all related to protecting your identity.  If anything, having a Facebook account makes you more vulnerable to identity theft.  The FBI even has a name for identity thefts carried out through social networks:  “identity theft social engineering.”  It’s more effective than other forms of identity theft because it often comes through our Facebook friends, whom we’re more likely to trust.

Secondly, as we’ve all seen, anyone can make a Facebook account.  You’re not supposed to, according to Facebook’s Terms of Use, but it happens all the time.  To illustrate this, I made an account for my cat this morning:

If my cat can get a Facebook account, so can anyone. Or anything.

Then I signed my cat, who has the very distinguished name of Lance, into TrueRep with Facebook Connect:

He's a very sociable cat. Feel free to send him friend requests.

And right away, my cat was a TrueRep member.  So the whole part about requiring you to sign in with a Facebook account as some protective measure against “others who may want to claim your identity” is, pardon our French, total crap.  We realize that Intelius wants to use some form of identity verification, but Facebook connect–at least in its current form–isn’t cutting it.

Lance is very concerned with his online reputation.

Intelius, one of the biggest databases of background check information, is no stranger to privacy-related complaints:  their network of sites has come under fire for deceptive marketing, unauthorized charges to customers’ credit cards, having inaccurate data (although this might be a good thing for those of us worried about our privacy), not honoring opt-out requests, and having a complicated opt-out process.

If you want to opt yourself out of their databases, and those of many other similar sites, we wrote a page explaining how to do it yourself for free.

What do you think?  Would you trust TrueRep with your personal information?  How do you feel about sites that require you to log in with Facebook connect?

How encryption can keep Facebook from snooping in your chats

October 4th, 2011

We figured now’s a good time to get the word out about our encrypted Facebook chat, now that the news has broken on exactly how much data Facebook collects about you.

Facebook collects and stores information in at least 57 different categories, including chats.

Facebook collects and stores its users' data in all of the above categories. That's a lot of info on all of us.

Facebook draws a distinction between the old chat system, which wasn’t linked to your private messages/inbox, and the new one, which is.  Chats in the new system, the one you’re using right now, are stored forever, while chats in the old system were stored but ultimately deleted after a period of time.

The website Europe-v-facebook.org reports that you cannot delete your Facebook messages and chats.  Even if you hit “delete,” you’re only making them invisible to you:  Facebook and law enforcement agencies can still access them, and Facebook is a major source of evidence in all sorts of lawsuits, particularly divorces.  (Another interesting fact:  more courts are allowing plaintiffs to serve legal documents through social networks.)

So what can you do to protect your Facebook conversations?

Encrypt them.  Our completely free bookmarklet will encrypt your chats using a secure encryption algorithm called Blowfish that’s a well-known standard in the security industry.

An encrypted chat window.

So although you’re typing,

I hope facebook can’t see this!

and both you and your chat partner can read it like normal, anyone else would see something like,

JKLS89202JLAD8290N3289FSHADK39

For a step-by-step, pictoral tour and more technical details about how encryption works, visit our encrypted facebook chat page.

Your chats will look like gobbledygook to everyone except you and the person you're talking to.

Note that although citizens of the European Union have the right to access all the data that websites store about them (and can make their request to Facebook here), we’re not so lucky in the US.  Let’s keep pushing for that right, guys!

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.

Privacy is Not About Hiding Bad Things

October 17th, 2011

The following post was written by Sarah A. Downey, an attorney and privacy analyst at Abine.  It is part 1 in a 3-part series on what privacy is not, allowing us to define what privacy is by examining what it isn’t.

Privacy isn’t about hiding bad things.  It’s about protecting our freedom to do good things.  Until we recognize this simple distinction, we’re in trouble.

Privacy isn’t some dark shadow that only “bad people” pull over themselves when they’re doing “bad things.”  Stop thinking about it like that.  Instead, picture it like the protection of a high-walled room with an open ceiling.  We each have our own room, and they’re all part of one enormous house.  We’re connected to our friends, family, and acquaintances through doors that we control.

Let’s say you’ve chosen to close your doors.  You stand in the center of your room.  No matter how hard you try, you can’t look over the walls.  Nor can anyone else look in and see you.  Once you choose to close your doors, no one is tracking your movements; no one can hear what you say; no one can read what you’ve written; no one knows who you’ve been hanging out with.  You can do what you want without judgment or consequence.  No one is watching you.  You’re free.  You can open certain doors to specific people, knowing that they’re the only ones with whom you’re sharing.  Privacy provides both the boundaries of and protection for the space in which we can be ourselves.

These are the “good things” that privacy nurtures:  self-expression, creativity, speaking your mind, associating with whomever you wish, and exploring your interests.  These are the First Amendment’s protections:  freedom of speech, of association, and of assembly.  They’re so important for self-actualization and self-determination that our founders immortalized them in the Bill of Rights.

Note that I’m representing privacy by high walls with an open ceiling, rather than an impenetrable fortress.  The sky remains open.  It’s a place from which others may see you, but it’s rare, and you expect it.  You’re aware of its presence.  The risk to your privacy is clearly delineated:  the only checks on your privacy come through that opening.  Anything else is a violation.

Think of the sky like an “out” for greater scrutiny during times of national crisis, or a clearly-worded Privacy Policy.  You should know when you’re being watched, and there should be a damn good reason.  It should be reserved for extenuating circumstances, things like dire national crises.  We should examine these things with skepticism; we should question them, not accept them because some vague threat is invoked.  They should not be the norm.

But privacy violations are closing in on us, chipping away at our walls one inch at a time.  Advertising networks are tracking everything we do online.  Companies are selling our home addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, and lists of family members.  Facebook collects and stores every post, picture, and poke, selling our information to third parties.  Google’s trying to get rid of aliases on the internet. Apple patented facial recognition software, and they’re not the only ones who have it.

The walls are coming down, piece by piece, and now we can see neighboring hills and landscapes; make out the outlines of trees.  But just because we can enjoy seeing more doesn’t mean that we’re freer.  To the contrary.  Alongside this new openness comes increased visibility and scrutiny of our behavior.  We can see more of the world, but the world can see more of us.  Facebook and social networking sites may make us feel more connected, as though the possibilities for expression are greater, but so are the possibilities for exploitation.

We act differently when others are watching us.  It’s human nature.  You wouldn’t walk around naked while belting Madonna into your hairbrush while you’re at work, but plenty of you reading this have become impromptu rockstars at home.  You wouldn’t think twice about it within the encirclement of your private room’s walls.

We also act differently depending on who’s watching us.  Having a close friend nearby may not dissuade you from morphing into the Material Girl, but perhaps a stranger would.  Almost certainly, a full house of US senators would.

Online, the audience is limitless.  Anyone could be watching–advertising networks, potential employers, ex-spouses, stalkers, the government–and those of us who understand this risk tailor our behavior accordingly.  We censor ourselves.  We become intentionally uncontroversial; unintentionally boring.  We don’t say what we truly think because it might put us at risk for punishment later.

Pseudonyms help, but they’re not a perfect fix.  They require us to subdivide our identities, manage our self-inflicted multiple personality disorders, just to feel like a whole person.  Google and Facebook are trying their hardest to make them obsolete.  The way things are going, they may succeed.

Many of us believe that less privacy is good because people will stop doing, or posting about, illegal activities if they know they’re being watched.  It’s only those people with something to hide who have to worry, right?

Wrong.  Although it’s legal for consenting adults to have sex and drink alcohol, for example, any record of these activities can lead to public outcry.  Anthony Weiner lost his senate seat because of a twitpic; high school English teacher Ashley Payne lost her job because of a beer in a facebook photo.  Sixty-nine percent of employers say they’ve decided not to hire someone based on that person’s online identity.  They often cite “inappropriateness,” whatever that means.  The world exercises its judgment on which activities are worthy and which are not.  It’s a moral, not a legal, judgment.  It’s not the separation of church and state that the First Amendment strives to give us.

We won’t stop drinking; we won’t stop having sex.  Nor should we:  both are within our rights.  But we’ll think twice before we leave admit, digitally, that we’re doing it.  And we shouldn’t have to.  We’re consenting adults; we’re not doing anything illegal.  Why shouldn’t we express ourselves?  Isn’t that what the First Amendment is all about?

Our conception of privacy is even more important when we consider that it shapes the law.  The Fourth Amendment, which protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures, actually changes depending on society’s collective expectation of privacy.  Here’s an example.  You’re a student, and you find out that your school has installed a webcam in your laptop and school officials are using it to watch you while you’re at home.  (Sounds like sci-fi horror?  This actually happened in a Pennsylvania school system in 2010.)

Whether watching you on these webcams is a “reasonablesearch depends on (1), your individual expectation of privacy, given the situation; and (2), society’s collective expectation of privacy.  The test is both subjective and objective, respectively.  If society grows accustomed to a world without privacy, this second portion of the test is harder to meet.  These webcams posed a Fourth Amendment problem, in part, because society deemed them an unreasonable privacy violation.  But in the society of Orwell’s 1984, in-home surveillance was a legal, and expected, part of life.  It all depends on the context, which is why it’s our responsibility to stay vigilant.

While current technology has begun to censor what we say, facial recognition software threatens to censor what we do, even offline.  Imagine that you’re known in your community for being an animal rights activist, but you secretly love a good hamburger.  You’re sneaking in a double cheeseburger at a local restaurant when, without your knowledge, someone snaps a picture of you.  It’s perfectly legal for someone to photograph you in a public place, and aside from special rights of publicity for big-time celebrities, you don’t have any rights to control this photo.  This person may not have any ill intentions; he may not even know who you are.  If he uploads it to facebook, and facebook automatically tags you in it, you’re in trouble.

Same goes for the staunch industrialist caught at the grassroots protest; the pro-life female politician caught leaving an abortion clinic; the CEO who has too much to drink at the bar; the straight-laced lawyer who likes to dance at goth clubs.  If anyone with a cell phone can take a picture, and any picture can be tied back to us even when the photographer doesn’t know who we are, we may stop going to these places altogether.  We may avoid doing anything that could be perceived as controversial.  And that would be a pity, because we shouldn’t have to.

People aren’t sufficiently worried about privacy issues because they think, “I have nothing to hide; these things don’t apply to me.”  This mindset is based on the faulty assumption that privacy is all about hiding negative things.  It’s about positive rights, too:  the right to live and speak freely without outside scrutiny.  When we feel we’re being watched, we censor ourselves.  Tracking and surveillance have chilling effects on freedom of speech, freedom of association, self-expression, and other celebrated, protected activities.  Simply put, we aren’t ourselves when we think others are watching.  This is the privacy violation with which we should concern ourselves.  This is the risk.

It’s harder to rebuild something after it’s broken than to prevent its destruction in the first place.  We need to stop our walls from coming down.  We need to make smarter choices about the services we use, the features we demand, and the petitions we sign.  We need to be active participants in the privacy debate.  Then, maybe, we can build up our protection again.

What tech execs are saying about your privacy

October 11th, 2011

For more background on Eric Schmidts’s quote, here’s an infographic showing how they know all this stuff.

Did we forget a good quote?  Do you know any other quotes about privacy by tech execs?  Post them below and we’ll add them to the list.

LinkedIn Selling Your Resume? Going Public Is Changing How LinkedIn Uses Your Personal Info

October 24th, 2011

LinkedIn has a new product that’s geared more towards building revenue than building relationships.  It’s called Talent Pipeline, and it’s for job recruiters to go after “passive talent:”  gifted potential employees who aren’t actively looking for jobs.

LinkedIn: not the most privacy-friendly company.

As blogger Lauren Fisher notes on simplyzesty.com, it looks like LinkedIn is “moving more into being a network for recruiters, as opposed to a pure-play social network for business types.”  She predicts that Talent Pipeline marks a shift to LinkedIn becoming “a product simply for recruiters and advertisers,” rather than a place where real people have real interactions.

Maybe it makes sense.  After all, Facebook, Twitter, and Google + have a tight grip on social networking, and LinkedIn has always been the more uptight and less interesting sibling.  Going after the recruiter market and turning LinkedIn into a purely business-related product may prove lucrative, which would make investors who weathered a mediocre start happy.

As long as users continue to look to LinkedIn as a place to share with each other, though, be warned:  LinkedIn isn’t just making money through banner ad revenue and things like Talent Pipeline.  Its sharing buttons across the web collect a lot of information on users, tracking them wherever a LinkedIn button can be found.  This information, in turn, is extremely valuable to advertisers.

Sharing buttons are more of a benefit to LinkedIn than to you.  The wealth of information they provide is pretty shocking:

When you visit LinkedIn.com, it puts a cookie on your computer.  That cookie stays on your computer and transmits information about you wherever you go.

Although not nearly as many websites have LinkedIn buttons on them as Facebook or Twitter, a lot of them still do:

Trends.BuiltWith.com provides great info on all sorts of technology used across the web, including LinkedIn:

If you want to amp up your LinkedIn privacy settings–and we suggest you do–Paul Laudanski wrote a helpful guide to protecting yourself.  It covers everything from logging in to profile visibility.

About Abine:  Abine, Inc., The Online Privacy Company, is the leading provider of online privacy solutions for consumers.  Abine’s products and services allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact, and shop online.

Parents, Lies, & Facebook

November 3rd, 2011

Some people seem surprised that millions of parents are lying to Facebook and violating its Terms of Use to create profiles for their under-13 children.

We think it’s natural.

We think children and parents should be able to lie more online.  We should be able to sign up for websites with fake names, have emails sent to fake addresses, and give out fake phone numbers.  Why?  Because it protects our real information, our real selves.

We even think this is good parenting.

Using Facebook and other online sharing services is a big part of all of our digital lives…

… but telling Facebook lots of real, personal information about ourselves shouldn’t have to be.

Even in our modern times where 2-year-olds use iPads, kids 12 and younger are getting help from their parents to set up Facebook accounts: a Microsoft survey found that nearly 8 out of 10 parents had helped their children under 12 to join the Facebook party.

Of course, Facebook only allows only children 13 and over to create accounts, so parents are breaking “Facebook law” by lying to create these profiles.

Did you know:  if you don’t give Facebook your real name and birth date, you’re also violating Facebook’s rules?

Facebook sometimes asks users to prove they are who they say they are by providing a copy of government-issued identification.

We don’t want to pick too much on Facebook’s Terms of Use:  Google+ recently released the same kind of “real names” policy and is busy extending Google+’s grip.  This insistence on using your real name has fueled a big debate, called the nymwars, about whether we have a right to choose how we identify ourselves online.  Privacy advocate Danah Boyd wrote a great piece arguing that real names policies are abusive, and tech journalist Violet Blue was kicked off Google+ because they thought her name was fake–it’s her legal name.  Although ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt defended the policy, it looks like Google lost the nymwars:  they recently announced that they’re going to let people use pseudonyms.

Bottom line?

Use your favorite services, pay them if you love them, click on ads if you’re interested, but don’t tell them too much about your personal life.   Your home address, your exact birthdate, and your email can all be used to identify you.  Corporations, identity thieves, and scammers can link your offline life, including your credit scores and buying habits, to your digital trails.  None of us want to worry about that:  not today, and definitely not in the future.

gIf you regain control over who can access your personal info, you can keep using the web the way you want to without worrying.  You should decide who’s allowed to collect information about you as you surf.

That’s what our tools do.   That’s why we make them.  Add them to your browser now, before you click on that next link or register for that next account, and browse stress-free.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Love for our customers

November 3rd, 2011

One of our DeleteMe customers was so impressed with our DeleteMe service, which removes you from the biggest people search websites, that he sent us 2 pizzas today.  If you’ve ever received support from Abine, you’ve probably spoken to either Jeff or Sarah.  Here we are about to chow down:

Random acts of kindness/pizza deserve 2 thumbs up. Thank you, Herschell!

We’re big fans of our customers, and we’ve collected some of the love to share with you.  Here are customer quotes about our software and about DeleteMe.

We work hard to protect your online privacy, and we love hearing from you.  You can always reach us at support@abine.com or chat with us live.

We may have big ideas about privacy but we’re a small group, so if you’ve had a good experience with us–our software, DeleteMe, our support, our website—we’d really appreciate your help in getting the word out.

Here’s what you can do:

First things first:  try us out

  • Sample one of our privacy add-ons to protect yourself when you’re browsing
  • Try our DeleteMe service to remove unwanted content from the web

Like our stuff?  Give us good ratings

Read our privacy blog

Tell the world

  • Blog about us
  • Submit our pages to StumbleUpon (or give them a thumbs-up)
  • Link to us on your site
  • Comment about us on privacy-related news articles
  • Talk to people you know about us.  Yep, actual, non-digital talk.

Stalk, or, uh, follow us

Thank you!

- The Abine Team

Hi from our new office

November 8th, 2011

We recently moved from Central Square in Cambridge to downtown Boston, and today marks a milestone for us:  we finally got our coffee situation set up. Here’s a photo of what we’re working with:

Abine loves caffeine. Yes, that rhymes.

We wanted to show you what’s fueling us in our quest to get you better, smarter privacy.  And now, back to work!

USA Today uncovers Facebook tracking. We stop it.

November 16th, 2011

Facebook is more than a social network. It's a tracking system.

The secret’s out:  Facebook tracks you everywhere you go online for 90 days, even when you’re logged out, even if you’re not a member.  USA Today’s Byron Acohido shared the story today.

We hate to say we told you so, but we did:  we blogged about this problem over a month ago–not once, but twice–and we talked to the New York Times’s Riva Richmond about it in her story, “As ‘Like’ Buttons Spread, So Do Facebook’s Tentacles.”  We even made an infographic explaining how it works.  Ahem.

Meanwhile, we’ve been making an awesome browser add-on that solves the problem of Facebook (and other sites and companies) tracking you.  It’s time to stop hoping that Facebook has your best interests in mind when it comes to privacy–it doesn’t.  That’s why we made Do Not Track Plus.  You can still use Facebook and click “share” buttons, but you’ll limit sharing with the people you want, when you want.

Learn more about how it works here.

The benefits of Do Not Track Plus.

Do Not Track Plus:

1.  Blocks Facebook & others from tracking you by default

2.  Still lets you use Facebook & social sharing buttons

3.  Is easy to use, simple, and unobtrusive

Just a shot of us using a shower as a conference room

November 21st, 2011

We have a shower in our new office space, and although we’ve been here for over a month, no one’s used it yet.  Until now.  Say hello to David and Brian, who are putting the shower to good use:

You can't say we aren't resourceful...

David’s in marketing, and Brian does those cute cartoons you see on our site.  The rest of us will be sticking to our regular, non-shower desks for now.