“Privacy sandbox” destroyed: 3 billion Google Chrome users lost the chance for privacy on the Internet
As you know, third-party cookies are one of the most common tracking technologies that allow advertising companies and data brokers to collect and sell information about users' online activities.
In July, Google confirmed that its long-awaited elimination of the dreaded tracking cookies in Chrome had yet to happen. The company tried to reach a consensus with regulators that would balance its own interests with the interests of the marketing industry – but to no avail. “We’re offering a renewed approach that expands user choices,” the company teased on July 22, before snapping at its audience. “Instead of devaluing third-party cookies, we’re bringing a new experience to Chrome that empowers people to make informed choices that apply to all of their web surfing.”
Welcome to the Matrix
Most likely, this means that for their right to surf the World Wide Web, users can repay the search engine by choosing one of several evils: cookie tracking, the semi-anonymous Google Topics API, and semi-private browsing. It is also likely that Google surfers will be able to change this choice at any time. But it is not agreed yet.
That’s bad news for Chrome’s 3 billion users, most of whom will never change their settings and would prefer to use a more private browser.
The situation gave Apple a marketing trick: in its commercial, the telecommunications giant used scenes from Hitchcock’s The Birds to demonstrate as vividly as possible how users are being watched as they browse the web until Safari comes to the rescue.
Notably, just hours before this shocking news, the EFF (an international non-profit digital rights advocacy group based in San Francisco, California) saw fit to report that the Privacy Sandbox was Google’s way of allowing advertisers to continue targeting ads on based on your online behavior, even after Chrome completes its long-awaited rejection of third-party cookies.”
Another “privacy sandbox” false start
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Yes, Google’s “Privacy Sandbox” program sought to find an alternative to tracking cookies, but suffered false starts all along. Google’s promise to kill tracking cookies has remained a promise for four years now. Even grouping users into like-minded groups will not prevent digital fingerprinting as promised.
“We look forward to continuing to work with the ecosystem on the next stage of the journey to a more private Internet,” commented Google. But the actions speak for themselves: her decision to keep cookie tracking while acknowledging that an alternative plan to create a more private Internet has failed risks ringing hollow.
The family of browsers is not without geeks
The main problem of Google’s “privacy sandbox” was the dual role of this technological giant: on the one hand, it acts as the main guardian of the privacy of its users, and on the other – the main beneficiary of the monetization of all this data.
The EFF believes that Google’s strategy “underlines their continued commitment to profits, not to user privacy.” Safari and Firefox have found ways to block third-party cookies by default since 2020, and Google promised to do the same, but didn’t keep its promise.
Google’s move away from its privacy sandbox to a consent-based privacy model may not be everything the digital advertising industry hopes it will be. As Digiday points out, “Google doesn’t exactly kill third-party cookies; it just leaves the job to users.” And this again leads to another interesting twist – Apple.
Apple’s “app tracking transparency” vs Chrome’s “new experience”.
According to an anonymous advertising executive, privacy is a trap that Google and Apple use to create advantages for their businesses. Google still has access to all data at the transaction level, both competitors use identity systems that favor the big platforms and have huge login databases.
As one of the leaders of the global IT industry, Apple has long been setting the standards for reliability and controlled privacy, and has distinguished itself from its competitor Google with its marketing techniques. The complicated relationship between Google and Apple is evident in this story as well, with Apple launching a Safari privacy campaign and Chrome attack ads just days before the cookie news.
“Three years ago,” explains Digiday, “[Apple] introduced what you might call a polite doorman for every app on a user’s phone. Before allowing an app to follow a user to other apps or sites, the doorman asks, ‘Can this the app was watching what you were doing elsewhere?”. The user can answer “yes” or “no”.
We’re talking about Apple’s “App Tracking Transparency,” which has changed the rules of the smartphone privacy game. Not to be outdone, Google has hinted that it will do something similar, offering the market a “new Chrome experience” that will allow users to make informed choices when browsing the web that they can change at any time.
Perhaps Google sees a risk in the fact that in this way it will gain an imbalance in access to data. How such a user request will work remains to be seen, but it’s clear that Chrome is moving toward a consent-based privacy model. This means that web ads are starting to mirror ads in mobile apps, where both Google and Apple already use consent-based prompts to manage privacy settings.
Tatyana Morarash
