By John Oates for The
Register.
This story has been reproduced with permission.
However, the search giant hit back by briefing journalists that
PI was in the pocket of Microsoft.
The figures are a preliminary view, with the full research due
to be released in September.
Results are colour-coded from green, "privacy-friendly and
privacy enhancing", to black, which describes companies as having
"comprehensive consumer surveillance and entrenched hostility to
privacy". Only Google acheived the black ranking.
Also on the list was Microsoft, which was accused of "serious
lapses" around Windows Genuine Advantage and Passport. AOL, Apple,
Facebook, Hi5, and Reunion.com were all labelled red, posing a
"substantial threat" to users' privacy. Other companies on the list
include eBay, Friendster, LiveJournal, MySpace, Orkut, Skype, and
Wikipedia.
Much of the criticism of Google centred on its lack of
transparency - PI described its data retention policy as "unclear"
and its privacy policy as "vague, incomplete and possibly
deceptive".
A blog from one Google staffer noted that the search giant was
not credited for refusing to hand over user data to the US
government, that it didn't leak users' search queries like AOL had,
and that it now promises to anonymise search queries after 18
months.
The row might have disappeared over the weekend, but Privacy
International claimed Google was besmirching its good name.
In an open letter to Google's CEO Eric Schmidt, Privacy
International accused the search giant of launching a smear
campaign. PI said: "Two European journalists have independently
told us that Google representatives have contacted them with the
claim that 'Privacy International has a conflict of interest
regarding Microsoft'."
The letter said no company had made a similar accusation in the
17 years Privacy International has existed.
The letter accuses Google of naming a member of PI's 70 strong
advisory panel as a Microsoft employee. Simon Davies, of PI, said
the person in question had worked for PI for six years and was
described as "an exceptionally skilled IT and security expert".
Furthermore, the letter said: "He is a decent, skilled, and
honourable man who upon his appointment with Microsoft offered us
his resignation. We refused to accept it, and he continues to serve
on the board in a private capacity."
The letter ends: "I believe an apology from you is in order, but
if you cannot deliver this then I think you should reflect
carefully on the actions of your representatives before embarking
on what I believe amounts to a smear campaign. As with Microsoft,
eBay and any other organisation we are more than happy to work with
you to help resolve the many privacy challenges for Google that our
report has highlighted."
Privacy International looked at 23 companies and measured 20
parameters, such as whether a company had a privacy department,
what kinds of information it collects, and how data is
retained.
Privacy International's Privacy Rankings are
here. The Google staffer blog is
here, and Simon Davies' letter to Eric Schmidt is
here.
© The Register
2007
