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 270: Roundtable on the Bill C-22 Risks for Canadian Tech Companies Featuring VPN Services Tailscale and Windscribe
byMichael Geist

May 25, 2026
Michael Geist
May 11, 2026
Michael Geist
May 4, 2026
Michael Geist
April 27, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
Why Mark Carney’s Antisemitism Speech Did Not Meet the Moment
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 270: Roundtable on the Bill C-22 Risks for Canadian Tech Companies Featuring VPN Services Tailscale and Windscribe
RCMP Confirms Bill C-22 Concerns: Police Want Law to Provide Access to Encrypted Communications
More Misinformation on Bill C-22 as the Government Struggles to Defend Its Lawful Access Plan
The Phony Phone Book Analogy: How Liberal Cabinet Ministers and MPs are Misleading Canadians About the Privacy Risks of Bill C-22

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.