how this will work with a user that never accepts cookies and if a cookie is essential to view the content only allows the cookie for that session. A user that has also blocked google-analytics and *.doubleclick.* and every other damned ad server out there, blocks scripts by default again only allowing them to run if essential to the sites' function and refreshes his/her dynamic IP address every two days?

I would be impressed if Google could track and supply targeted advertising to that user, and if they can, could someone enlighten me as to how so I can do something about it.

Where's the no-entry icon? Ahh I guess stop will do

Firefox + Adblock Plus.

Yep.

If you follow the opt-out links from Google and you're using Chrome it tells you to to set the cookie options to "restrict how third party cookies can be used" and this prevents any data being sent. This, they say, is the same as permanently opting out.

If you're already happy to use cookies with Google, this is no more sinister. If you still don't like the idea, just stop using Google altogether. It's not like it's monitoring all your surfing habits, like it would if it was based at your ISP, a la Phorm.

Don't worry, be happy.

Look into Front Porch, Inc. They have a product called a PorchLight that can do behavioral targeting based on IP address, not on name, credit card number, or anything else personally identifying. Best of all, it's a non-cookie based opt-out, so when you opt out, you opt out.

I thought it was just my browser blocking parts of the storynot just el reg censoring stories!

Helicopter, because, hell, even that's missing now!

What Google is doing is serving up ads based on a tracking cookie on AdSense-containing web pages that the user visits. This is intrusive and annoying, but blockable.

What BT-Phorm are intending to do is sniff a user's entire traffic at ISP level. That is unacceptable, and probably also illegal.

Notwithstanding Google's slogan "do no evil", they don't give a shit about anybody's privacy. So much is obvious, and has been for quite some time.

When Google took over blogger. com, I deleted my blogs, then the Google profile I'd had to set up to retrieve them. Now, with the latest news about their snoopiness I've set my Firefox user agent string to "Fuck you Google!". This is a little more straightforward than the "Eye o'Sauron" I used to use.

And for most searches I no longer use Google, preferring ixquick.com.

Stop it. Google.

CustomizeGoogle 0.76 <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/743>

And just to be safe: Untick "Accept 3rd party cookies"

Well, I hardly ever see them (various FF plugins), but if I do have to see the buggers I'd rather they were about things that interest me rather than cialis and that ilk.

Sometimes maybe I would actually be interested in a new canoe paddle, if it's a good deal at the right price :)

You can set it to anonymise the google cookie. Also stops google tracking your searches.

Of course, you should also be using Adblock Plus.

would mean that you'd need to find a way of identifying yourself wherever this matters. Who wants to have to log in to a search engine?

...look on the good side. For the Yoof, it will be so much easy to.... "Find Happy Slapping On eBay".

As the wife is a Social Worker, going to be interesting what ad's will be server to her...."Find Domestic Abuse on eBay"

Of course could back fire for many, when there other halfs log in and get ads.... "Find Hot Leather Teen Action on eBay"

Mate, try this: the next time these miscreants leave unctuous deposits, get hold of a tin of Mr Muscle Oven Cleaner, take a deep breath and quickly cover the warm surface with foam. Then get the fuck out of Dodge and shut the door, preferably leaving your neuronically-challenged cooker-sharers inside. Oh, you can breath at this point. Those inside may have minor respiratory problems. This should enhance the importance of cleaning up after one's culinary adventures.

Oh, the Mr Mister Muscle Oven Cleaner is extremely effective - it'll clear the dingleberries off a rabid dog's freckle. I've used it on a motorbike not cleaned for twelve moths to great effect (watch out for the alloy parts though).

Sorry this is slightly off-topic but these things need to be addressed I feel.

/apron with pockets

"I'm fine, I run adblock"

no you're not, you just don't see them!

consider peer guardian.

this is all getting too much too quick, I'm looking forwards to the tabloid press realising that all this Deep Profiling is gonna screw their advertising revenue as greedy company's blow their wad on tracking Jo, John and Diane because they need incontinence pads.

if there is hope it lays with the paroles.

As Flash said; "Nursey ! Am I pleased to see you or did I just put a canoe in my pocket ?"

that Adblock Plus just stops the ads being displayed; it doesn't stop Google profiling you. So if you're worried about your privacy, then Adblock Plus doesn't help.

What you need is Scroogle.org for your searches, use the TrackMeNot plugin for firefox (just to fuck with their stats) and then set firefox to delete your cookies each time you close the browser.

Et voila: privacy. Until your packet-stream gets raped at your ISP.......

never really felt the need to use adblock etc. until now as Google's ads never seems intrusive, however, with this news it's just gone onto all my machines.

For "If you're a savvy Reg reader..." read "If you're a tinfoil-hat-wearing paranoid..."

Good grief, man ! Do you ever use a debit/credit card for online payments or in bricks-and-mortar shops ? Guess what ? You're being profiled ! If not, then my apologies for my presumption.

You continue: "The trouble is, of course, they *like* the apparent ease of so-called 'services' from free-to-use portals like MSN, Yeehaw and Google.

What does one do to protect the stupid and lazy from their stupidity and laziness?"

Google provides the best search engine - by far - in the Interwebz and the reason it's free to use is that they get an income from advertisers. If we geeks supply every 'lazy and stupid' web user in the world with the means to defeat ads, guess what'll happen ? That's right - the best damned search engine on the Web becomes a subscription-based fee-paying service. Thanks, mate !

Let's keep the AdBlockPlus trick (and its ilk) secret for us and our immediate friends and family.

Thanks for your post, after playing with the site for a while I switched all my browsers (FF of course) to ixquick and removed Google as an option. Running ixquick and AdBlock Plus I feel safe. Well, at least I wont be feeding the big "G" Goon squad any more that I can tell.

...NoScript ,AdBlocker, CustomizeGoogle and TrackMeNot; bitches.

That is all.

As several people have rightly pointed out, this seems cookie based, so it's easy to disable without having to accept an opt-out cookie. At the URL linked from the article, I get the message

"Your browser's cookies seem to be disabled. Ads Preferences will not work until you enable cookies in your browser."

All well and good. As long as Google doesn't switch to tracking by IP.

So: how long are ISPs going to allow broadband customers to get a new IP address every time they want one? My DHCP lease is over a week long, and I'm not convinced that my ISP wouldn't just give me the same IP back again even if I did switch my cable modem off long enough. Certainly that's what it does if I deliberately release and refresh.

With sites like Wikipedia blocking by IP address, customers are going to be less and less impressed with the idea that their ISP has given them a ropey, pre-owned IP address that some vandal or unsuspecting bot-owner has managed to get banned from half the web. Prior to IPv6, the only solution is one IP address per customer, and if you break it, tough luck.

Once Google can rely on one household per IP address (at least within blocks it knows are residential ISPs), then why *wouldn't* it target ads by IP, in cases where cookies are blocked? Sure, you conflate a small number of users, and advertise tellytubbies to Dad and porn^Hcars to the kids, but it's still better than no targeting at all.

That's why log anonymisation matters, at least for those not already using TOR. Your IP address either already is personally identifying information, or will be soon.

...but plenty of AdBlock etc.

Of course, Scroogle *could* be untrustworthy also, but, they don't have the global reach of Google, so are comparitively, a safe bet.

If I were Google, I'd be asking Scroogle how much money they wanted, for selling their IP logs!

Perhaps TOR to Scroogle, just to be sure? ;)

Matt :)