Google hit with FTC complaint, says circumventing Safari privacy features accidental
The Consumer Watchdog advocacy group today asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether Google violated a previous privacy agreement with the FTC by tracking cookies in a way that circumvents default privacy settings in Apple's Safari browser. Google's method of getting around Safari's default blockage of third-party cookies was detailed today in a study by Stanford grad student Jonathan Mayer and in two articles in the Wall Street Journal. One Journal headline calls it "Google's iPhone tracking," but the technique actually works across iPhones, iPads, iPod touches, and desktop computers. After being contacted by the Journal, Google disabled the code that had allowed it to install tracking cookies on Safari, even though the browser is designed to block such cookies by default.
A third-party website can use JavaScript to submit a form in an iframe without user interaction. This post focuses on the last behavior. We discovered four advertising companies that surreptitiously submit a form in an invisible iframe and place trackable cookies in Safari: Google, Vibrant Media, Media Innovation Group, and PointRoll.
A Sad State of Internet Affairs: The Journal on Google, Apple, and “Privacy” | John Battelle's Search Blog
In short, Apple’s mobile version of Safari broke with common web practice, and as a result, it broke Google’s normal approach to engaging with consumers. Was Google’s “normal approach” wrong? Well, I suppose that’s a debate worth having – it’s currently standard practice and the backbone of the entire web advertising ecosystem – but the Journal doesn’t bother to go into those details. One can debate whether setting cookies should happen by default – but the fact is, that’s how it’s done on the open web.
Confirmed: iPad 3 Has a 2048x1536 Retina Display - Mac Rumors
iPad 3 screen should carry a full resolution of 2048x1536, exactly twice the linear resolution of the iPad 1 and iPad 2 which is 1024x768. Such a screen should be able to display much sharper images as compared to the previous generation iPads.
Foxconn Auditor Finds ‘Tons of Issues’ - Bloomberg
“We’re finding tons of issues,” van Heerden said en route to a meeting where FLA inspectors were scheduled to present preliminary findings to Foxconn management. “I believe we’re going to see some very significant announcements in the near future.”
US Returns JotForm.com Domain; Still Refuses To Say What Happened | Techdirt
So far, the Secret Service still isn't talking, returning a bland and meaningless statement to press requests: "We are aware of the incident and we're reviewing it internally to make sure all the proper procedures and protocols were followed." GoDaddy, similarly, appears to be staying almost entirely silent.
Why Pinterest Is Playing Dumb About Making Money - Alexis Madrigal - Technology - The Atlantic
But let's get real here: Silberman's company had been happily using and making money with SkimLinks for 2 YEARS. Then, suddenly, $37 million of venture capital falls into their hands and suddenly all they care about is building that "a lot of people use to plan and discover things."
Facebook hacker sentenced to 8 months jail time | VentureBeat
Between April 27 and May 9 of 2011, Mangham repeatedly hacked into various Facebook servers. Mangham was arrested in June 2011 and officially charged in August with five counts of computer hacking. The youngster from York later admitted his guilt, but said his actions were intended to help Facebook improve security.
Iran’s Deadly Cyber Police: Indefinite Detention and Execution for Netizens | ZDNet
The web developer and IT professionals Vahid Asghari and Ahmad Reza Hasempour were arrested at the same time. They were targeted because they were seen as capable of hosting, or assisting with the building of websites. Each were sentenced to death last month.
Pinterest Is Not “Playing Dumb” About Making Money | TechCrunch
This runs counter to what I’ve heard about the actual amount of revenue brought in to Pinterest by SkimLinks, which was modest for an Internet company — between 10 to 20k a year according to one source. Using Madrigal’s formula, this would represent somewhere between $300,000 – $615,000 in transactions coming through the service.
In a possible indication of divergence of interests within Google, Downey recounted how a Google ad executive initially told the firm it couldn't run an ad designed to educate people about the privacy issues with cookies because it might be seen as "fear mongering." The Abine ad was eventually allowed to run, however, after the case was elevated.