The article lacks sufficient detail to judge what is going on. It states:
>On August 14, 2020, a Google user had accessed an Austrian website about health issues. This website used Google Analytics, and data about the user was transmitted to Google. Based on this data, Google was able to deduce who he or she was.
Huh? How? I know how Google Analytics works and a lot (if not all) the user markers are anonymous. It would be nice to see more detail on this claim.
>The standard contractual clauses invoked by the website operator do not help, as recognized in 2020 by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in its decision on the “Privacy Shield” (Schrems II).
What are the standard contractual clauses? Do they mean that fucking cookie consent banner that appears on every dam website asking if you consent to cookies? If that’s what they mean then are they saying it’s useless? So why are they on every good dam website? 😂
>The decisive factor for the legal assessment of the use of Google Analytics is not whether a U.S. intelligence agency actually obtained the data or whether Google actually identified the user. The mere fact that this was theoretically possible already was a violation of the GDPR.
Well please tell us how it is possible.
>Google users can, however, make a setting in their Google accounts to stop Google from evaluating their use of third-party websites in detail. But that this feature exists is proof that Google is able to merge usage data to with the individual.
Errr, I’m struggling to parse what this is saying. It’s so badly worded. Are they talking about third party cookies? That’s a *web* feature not a Google feature. All browsers give you control to opt out of third party cookies. Are they saying they’ve found instances where Google has abused this mechanism? Again do let the readers know.
>To the contrary – and as privacy is becoming increasingly important to consumers around the world – it is a logical step for any European business to choose services that focus on protecting their users’ privacy.
>
>Tutanota, for instance, is a secure German email provider that is in full compliance with the GDPR.
1 comment
The article lacks sufficient detail to judge what is going on. It states:
>On August 14, 2020, a Google user had accessed an Austrian website about health issues. This website used Google Analytics, and data about the user was transmitted to Google. Based on this data, Google was able to deduce who he or she was.
Huh? How? I know how Google Analytics works and a lot (if not all) the user markers are anonymous. It would be nice to see more detail on this claim.
>The standard contractual clauses invoked by the website operator do not help, as recognized in 2020 by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in its decision on the “Privacy Shield” (Schrems II).
What are the standard contractual clauses? Do they mean that fucking cookie consent banner that appears on every dam website asking if you consent to cookies? If that’s what they mean then are they saying it’s useless? So why are they on every good dam website? 😂
>The decisive factor for the legal assessment of the use of Google Analytics is not whether a U.S. intelligence agency actually obtained the data or whether Google actually identified the user. The mere fact that this was theoretically possible already was a violation of the GDPR.
Well please tell us how it is possible.
>Google users can, however, make a setting in their Google accounts to stop Google from evaluating their use of third-party websites in detail. But that this feature exists is proof that Google is able to merge usage data to with the individual.
Errr, I’m struggling to parse what this is saying. It’s so badly worded. Are they talking about third party cookies? That’s a *web* feature not a Google feature. All browsers give you control to opt out of third party cookies. Are they saying they’ve found instances where Google has abused this mechanism? Again do let the readers know.
>To the contrary – and as privacy is becoming increasingly important to consumers around the world – it is a logical step for any European business to choose services that focus on protecting their users’ privacy.
>
>Tutanota, for instance, is a secure German email provider that is in full compliance with the GDPR.
Ahhhh it all makes sense now. 😜