Matthew Ingram and others have questioned the response to AOL’s release of search data. The skeptics argue that the privacy concerns have been overblown, noting that no one has actually been personally identified through their searches. No longer. The NY Times runs a story in which it was relatively easy to identify a Georgia woman (AOL Searcher 4417749), with her search history telling a remarkably personal story over a three month period. The article provides a powerful illustration not only of the severity of the AOL mistake (which remains online for all to see), but of why search companies simply should not be retaining this data for any significant period of time. The public privacy risks, whether self-inflicted, from hackers, or via law enforcement fishing expeditions, outweigh the private commercial benefits.
Why the AOL Search Fiasco Matters
August 8, 2006
Share this post
5 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 263: The Lawful Access Act Roundtable With David Fraser and Robert Diab
byMichael Geist

March 30, 2026
Michael Geist
March 16, 2026
Michael Geist
March 2, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
Why the Verdict on Social Media Defective Design Harming Children Gets the Instinct Right But the Law Wrong
Scoping in the Tech Giants: Bill C-22’s International Production Order and the Shift to a Less Privacy-Protective Cross-Border Disclosure System
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 263: The Lawful Access Act Roundtable With David Fraser and Robert Diab
When Writing About Antisemitism Proves the Point: What the Replies Reveal
Acting on Antisemitism: If This Was Always Possible, Why Didn’t It Happen Sooner?

I’m sure the “skeptics” will now move to phase 2: “Well, she wasn’t really HURT by the revelations, right? She has nothing to hide, she’s a grandma!” Just watch.
michael,
given the hailstorm of controversy, i’m amazed the aol database is still available. why wouldn’t they remove it immediately? it strikes me as a privacy and management fiasco.
Mark,
I believe AOL has removed the database. During the period it was available, others captured it with at least two sites hosting mirrors of the same information. This raises legal issues for those sites, but the incident illustrates that it is nearly impossible to put the data genie back in the bottle.
MG
Big Brother
Here is a related story – scary stuff:
[ link ]
What about the cross border issues now? How many of these people were Canadians who’s data was released by an American company for American researchers to “learn from”?
This should really set of some discussion in Canada about what Canadian information is being extracted from Canada for sale in the US.