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 200: Colin Bennett on the EU’s Surprising Adequacy Finding on Canadian Privacy Law
byMichael Geist
April 22, 2024
Michael Geist
April 15, 2024
Michael Geist
April 8, 2024
Michael Geist
March 25, 2024
Michael Geist
March 18, 2024
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
- The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 200: Colin Bennett on the EU’s Surprising Adequacy Finding on Canadian Privacy Law
- Debating the Online Harms Act: Insights from Two Recent Panels on Bill C-63
- The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act
- AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions
- The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 198: Richard Moon on the Return of the Section 13 Hate Speech Provision in the Online Harms Act
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.