news.sky.com
Meta and Yandex Covertly Track Android Users' Browsing Data
Meta and Yandex secretly tracked Android users' browsing data via background scripts, bypassing privacy settings on major browsers; Google confirmed this violated its security principles, prompting Meta to pause the feature and Yandex to deny collecting sensitive data.
- What immediate steps are Google, Meta, and Yandex taking to rectify this covert data collection, and what are the immediate consequences for affected users?
- Meta and Yandex have been secretly tracking Android users' browsing activity without consent, using background scripts to collect data from major browsers even in incognito mode. This violates Android's security and privacy principles, as confirmed by Google. Both companies are now addressing the issue; Meta has paused the feature, while Yandex denies collecting sensitive data.
- How did Meta and Yandex circumvent Android's security measures to achieve this covert tracking, and what broader implications does this have for Android's security model?
- This covert data collection, discovered by academics at Radboud University and IMDEA Networks, reveals a concerning circumvention of user privacy controls. The tracking affected numerous websites across multiple browsers, spanning at least eight months for Meta and since 2017 for Yandex. The scale of the tracking—affecting 16,000 websites for Meta and 1,300 for Yandex within the EU alone—highlights the potential for widespread misuse of user data.
- What systemic changes are needed to prevent similar covert data collection practices in the future, and how can users better protect their privacy given the demonstrated vulnerabilities?
- This incident underscores the need for stronger user privacy protections and more robust oversight of data collection practices by tech giants. The ability to bypass incognito mode and standard browser privacy settings raises significant concerns about the future of online privacy and necessitates a thorough investigation into the broader implications of this type of covert data tracking. Expect increased scrutiny of background app processes and stricter regulations.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and opening sentences immediately frame the actions of Meta and Yandex as "covert tracking," setting a negative tone. While the companies' responses are included, the framing emphasizes the negative aspects of their actions. The use of words like "shocking" and "concerning" from experts further reinforces this negative framing.
Language Bias
Words like "covert," "bypassed," "invasive," and "blatantly violate" carry strong negative connotations, shaping the reader's perception of Meta and Yandex's actions. More neutral alternatives could include: "surreptitious," "circumvented," "unconventional," and "contravene." The repeated use of "shocking" and "concerning" also contributes to a negative tone.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of the specific technical methods used by Meta and Yandex to bypass Android's security measures. It also doesn't detail Google's investigation or the potential repercussions faced by Meta and Yandex. The lack of technical details limits the reader's ability to fully understand the extent and nature of the covert tracking.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between the tech companies' claims and the academics' findings, without exploring potential nuances or alternative interpretations of the data.
Gender Bias
The article focuses on the statements and findings of male academics (Dr. Acar, Narseo Vallina-Rodriguez, and Tim Vlummens). While this does not inherently constitute bias, it might benefit from including more diverse voices in the reporting.
Sustainable Development Goals
The covert tracking of user data by Meta and Yandex without consent is a violation of privacy and data protection principles, undermining trust in digital platforms and institutions. This impacts the ability of individuals to exercise their rights and have confidence in the rule of law regarding their personal information. The actions of these companies directly challenge principles of justice and fair access to information.