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 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada's Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
byMichael Geist

June 22, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
From CCH to ChatGPT: How Canadian Copyright Law Played the Key Role in Deciding a Leading AI Training Data Case in India
Starting Over: Court Filing Confirms the CRTC’s Streamer Contribution Decisions Are Dead With a Full Online Streaming Act Reset to Come
The Name on the Window Was Enough: The Attacks on Kiva’s and the Normalization of Antisemitic Violence in Canada
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada’s Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
A Surveillance Treaty in Disguise: The Trouble With Canada’s Quiet Decision to Sign the UN Cybercrime Convention

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.