[SATLUG] (OT) Privacy issues with Gmail?

[Matt]

Someone sent me this link regarding Gmail and I thought most of it was
pure BS.  Please let me know what you think?

http://www.gmail-is-too-creepy-com

On a side note, when asked what I felt about Gmail, I responded as so:

That is an interesting link, however there are a few things that need to
be addressed:

There is an issue that I have with 'Problem 4' on that page.
Problem 4: Inappropriate ad matching

We don't use Gmail, but it is safe to assume that the ad matching is no
better in Gmail, than it is in news articles that use contextual ad
feeds from Google. Here's a screen shot that shows an inappropriate
placement of Google ads in a news article. We also read about a lawyer
who is experimenting with Gmail. He sent himself a message, and
discovered that the law practice footer he uses at the bottom of all of
his email triggered an ad for a competing law firm.

The screen shot that he is referring to is a bit odd as Google is not
geting the information from the news site but rather Doubleclick. It's
doubleclick that is not passing the correct information to Google for
processing. It's also worth mentioning that the screenshot is NOT a shot
of Gmail but rather that of some news site. Gmail's ads are much less
unobtrousive and take up about as much as an inch wide by three inch
deep box on the right hand side of the mail you are reading.

The Gmail ad targeting appears to be far superior than that of news
sites (primarially because Google serves the ads not spyware-infested
Doubleclick,etc..) and is usually head-on with the topic of discussion.
Imagine my shock when talking to a friend about a firewire lattice
network I see ads describing firewire hardware and custom-length
cabling. Usually (in the case of Yahoo) their ads are mostly for the
University of Phoneix, Morgatgage your house, and ink toner refills.

Another issue that the page doesn't mention is that MSN, Hotmail, Yahoo
Mail and the other free services all use advertising as well A lot of it
is targeted against the content of the message that you happen to be
reading at the time. This has been proven time and time again to be
wildly inaccurate. What does home mortgages have to do with a server
log?

If these people don't like Gmail's TOS, why aren't they quoting the old
version versus the new versions? Have these people looked at Yahoo's
TOS?

This is Yahoo's TOS:

They do censoring:
You acknowledge that Yahoo! may or may not pre-screen Content, but that
Yahoo! and its designees shall have the right (but not the obligation)
in their sole discretion to pre-screen, refuse, or move any Content that
is available via the Service....

They too will turn over your personally identifiable info in a
heartbeat:
You acknowledge, consent and agree that Yahoo! may access, preserve, and
disclose your account information and Content if required to do so by
law or in a good faith belief that such access preservation or
disclosure is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process;
(b) enforce the TOS; (c) respond to claims that any Content violates the
rights of third-parties; (d) respond to your requests for customer
service; or (e) protect the rights, property, or personal safety of
Yahoo!, its users and the public.....

If pushed, they can tell you what you can and can not do with your
information:
You understand that the Service and software embodied within the Service
may include security components that permit digital materials to be
protected, and use of these materials is subject to usage rules set by
Yahoo! and/or content providers who provide content to the Service.....

Yahoo's privacy statement can be found at http://privacy.yahoo.com To
those of you reading Yahoo through Outlook or other HTML based email
client might want to reconsider if privacy is a big thing. Yahoo freely
admits to using 'web beacons' which are a way of telling when/if a
message has been opened, by whom and how many times it has been
forwarded, etc.
Details on web beacons can be found here:
http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us/pixels/details.html

If these people really want to nitpick, the only way to have guaranteed
security with your email would be to buy a dedicated server, load it up
with a monster-sized HD and let it send and receive email. That way you
don't have to worry about your email client working against you, but
what about the people who read it.

I'm open to discussion however I'm afraid that this is more
sensationalist than the issue really is.


What are your thoughts?