Jason Kint Profile picture
May 28, 2021 29 tweets 11 min read Read on X
incoming…
google

more unsealed docs, this time in the Google case led by Arizona Attorney General.
The newly unsealed material is underlined in green unsealed this week (left). Last year, Google proactively unsealed less risky material (right) when Judge first ruled. /1 ImageImage
When Association Press broke original report leading to this lawsuit, it triggered an emergency meeting with an *attention-grabbing* meeting name. The yellow here was actually learned last year when Google proactively unsealed bits (likely trying to muffle press cycles). /2 Image
But now we get the fully unsealed evidence which shows a much more important fact - CEO Sundar Pichai was directly involved. In fact, he received “code yellow” updates from an SVP who oversaw the area of concern who started at Google more than twenty years ago an intern. /3 Image
Most damning in newly unsealed evidence (1) Google’s employees admitting there's almost no way NOT to provide your location to Google (2) Google designs its ecosystem for location data collection.
“This doesn’t sound like something we would want on the front page of the NYT.” /4 Image
In fact, the VP of Maps at Google admitted during deposition that the only way to avoid Google inferring your home and work address is to essentially decide your own device by inserting false addresses. 🤦🏼‍♂️/5 Image
“WAA” stands for “Web and App Activity”… apparently you can turn it off and Location History off but then Google Maps does the surveillance for Google (note to all, switch to Apple Maps). Employees didn't seem to get this either. /6 Image
But we also learned in this newly unsealed material that something happens when settings make it easier for users to express their expectations not to have their physical location tracked. /7 Image
How big of a drop-off was it? Check this out from the unsealed discovery. When users turned off location services more and more, it made search less effective on the phone. That's a BIG problem for Google. /8 Image
Google had to go to work to bury the setting and get OEM partners to do the same in order to drive back up what they call the "Location Attach Rate." Again, unsealed parts in green. /9 Image
We don't know who all rolled over for Google. The complaint and employees said they didn’t have much choice as the only way to have Google’s key apps was to use their preferred design of Android. We did learn LG made the change for Google. /10 Image
This is all core to their surveillance economics. Attorney General’s team rightly looked at the resources Google uses to maximize “location attach rates.” You could also frame this as a surveillance beacon considering how Google appears to abuse it. /11 Image
Google’s own employees even comment how Apple is eating its lunch in the US market. No doubt, this only has become more so as Apple rolled out enhanced privacy features on iOS and its browser while Google’s surveillance economics continue to get more and more attention. /12 Image
Google's own employees seem to recognize Google’s need to maximize surveillance economics creates a tension with how users expect their Google-owned browser and operating system should work. This problem is getting worse by the day. /13
We also now see in exhibits that the AP story triggered honest reactions from Google’s own employees. Someone - likely in legal department - begged employees not to comment on the report likely knowing it would ultimately be included in discovery materials. /14 Image
Google employees' disgust and concern is immediately evident.
Even a privacy-focused Google engineer couldn’t protect her/his own location from the company. There is more here that's insane where they use non-google builds to try to not be tracked by their own company. /15 🤦🏼‍♂️ Image
This wasn’t exactly a new problem as it was identified there were five different settings to configure how they mine device usage. /16 Image
Amazing. According to the unsealed complaint, the senior product executive ***at Google*** and ***responsible for location services*** did not know how Google’s own location services interacted with each other. /17 Image
Google had clearly shifted its priorities over the years in how it treats location data. In the 2014-15 range, Google started collecting precise location data and then retreated in early 2019 sometime after the AP reported on their actual practices. Monopoly power. /18 Image
A lot of attention also on what is effectively a loophole that allows a company’s apps to continue to have the users’ location as long as they can get permission through at least one other owned app on the device. Google uses much-less powerful Uber as an example here... /19 Image
however, this loophole becomes a real problem when applied to dominance (Google)…. their own employees recognized their “landmark privacy policy” was created in order to allow them to mine behaviors across their products (and sync their cookie data, too, IIRC)…/20 Image
This is all relevant to emerging legislative fixes for Google and Facebook. Data protection and competition policy are being integrated recognizing how duopoly leverages data across dominant products. See Australia, Germany, UK, EU, state AG suits, FTC, and DOJ lawsuits. /21
Also, it’s a good reminder how Google, similar to Facebook, uses its unparalleled legal and comms teams to suppress scrutiny. As background, @DCNorg filed with @newsalliance (hat tip) to have these docs unsealed nearly a year ago ...and they were just unsealed this week. /22 ImageImageImageImage
I have little doubt that after Judge signaled he would unseal docs, Google proactively tried to unseal the most attention grabbing but least legal risky parts of this lawsuit to muffle press. /23
Somewhere in the evidence (there are a ton of docs) they even acknowledge how Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica mess spiked the press attention in how it was handled.
Hence my thread, this also deserves attention. /24
Here is a thread from last year when we initially filed to tie some of this together. /25
Here is the full set of docs from this week. Start with the refiled complaint at the top. Please reply here if I missed anything of significance or jump into my DMs. It takes a village. 🙏🏼 /26 azag.gov/media/interest…
ok, one more. this is literally a Google employee describing how he uses a fork of android in order to be "G-Free." IOW, please don't use our products at home if you want to avoid surveillance. /27 Image
ok, that's all for now. I recognize it's a Friday of a holiday weekend but that's the way they roll. It took me a few days to get through everything. Image
Credit to @Insider for covering ⬆️ as the docs were shared on the Friday of a holiday weekend. /end businessinsider.com/unredacted-goo…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jason Kint

Jason Kint Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jason_kint

Apr 11
!!!!! just unsealed, and higher than prior news reports. /1 Image
we learned last Fall in a different G lawsuit (NdCal) during widely reported testimony the number 36% as the share Google paid Apple to be locked in as default search across Apple's surfaces.
But now this was just unsealed from the two key contracts (here is 2014 which even then was 37.5%) /2Image
Here are the various Google and Apple contracts where those screen caps originate. /3 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Read 4 tweets
Mar 26
Whoa. Facebook had a secret "Project Ghostbusters" (get it?) which allegedly was to decrypt "man-in-the-middle" style Snapchat traffic to copy it. Yellow highlight indicates redactions just lifted in nine unsealed plaintiffs briefs in private antitrust lawsuit. Wild stuff. /1 Image
A lot of new stuff. There was lots of reporting (including Apple threats to boot Facebook) at the time on Facebook's software and Onavo acquisition allowing it to "spy" on competitive apps but I recall the decryption was written as a hypothetical. CEO email kickstarting it. /2 Image
You can read the press back in Jan 2019 spoon fed by Facebook PR to friendlies with no mentions of decrypting SSL then compare to this internal email below sent to Facebook's most senior executives - "currently includes SSL decryption"... /3 Image
Read 16 tweets
Mar 14
TikTok? Y’all are crazy. Yes, it’s a huge problem but hypocrisy. Last year after Facebook worked years to keep it sealed, a court unsealed its secret app audit. It showed 86,961 developers in China had access to all of our personal data…yet crickets. /1 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
This is the same app audit Zuckerberg promised Congress after concerns American’s personal data had been readily mined in Russia. Throw in Iran, North Korea, you name it. Press didn’t dig in. A good source told me DOJ and Congress hadn’t ever even seen this forensic audit. /2
Yet Facebook had spent four years trying very hard to keep even the names of the forensic auditing / clean-up firms confidential. Senate Intel Chairs did send a letter, no word on whether Facebook even responded to them. /3
Read 4 tweets
Mar 14
ok, I've now read the NYT response this week to attempts by OpenAI to dismiss NYT's landmark lawsuit against the high-flying AI company.
Put simply, NYT makes it brutally clear on page one how you can tell the difference between the two companies.
Oomph. /1 Image
A few other observations from me. Like NYT's original complaint, it's smart and future-focused on fair value. Where OpenAI made frankly bizarre claims NYT was hacking the platform as it detected OpenAI had its content, NYT is right. OpenAI isn't and can't dispute it copied it. /2 Image
Um, 2022 > 2020 = TRUE. Where OpenAI tried to inject a statute-of-limitations argument that OpenAI's lifting of content was "common knowledge" in 2020, NYT points out that ChatGPT and OpenAI didn't go viral until Nov 2022. /3 Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 6
That's rich.
Microsoft's motion to dismiss NYT landmark lawsuit against MSFT/OpenAI. The most valuable company on the planet at 3 trillion claims the right to mine (aka 'harness') every work of journalism as part of its 'collaboration.' Comparing it to copying video tapes. 1/6 Image
To be fair, MSFT, and its leadership, were testifying from Australia to US Congress on importance of a free and plural press and antitrust enforcement to support it just a few yrs ago. They genuinely seemed to care now Team Nadella has prioritized its OpenAI 'collaboration.' 2/6
I keep putting 'collaboration' in air quotes as it's an amusing attempt to reframe what is an investment worth tens of billions in which MSFT's CEO literally helped save the OpenAI CEO and company late last year. 'Collaboration' is a nice lawyer spin word for it. 3/6
Read 6 tweets
Mar 1
If you’re looking for positive courtroom news, Meta’s “nuclear” structural constitutional lawsuit v FTC in response to the FTC’s show cause to ban it from surveillance capitalism with minors went very very poorly just now. /1
Meta attempted to argue bias based on a few words in the show cause, not the statute itself, which the court called the “weakest argument” that there would be irreparable injury. A lot of back and forth but no ground given. /2
I bore you with this as the court also pointed out the high bar for irreparable injury in DC court and most small businesses can’t reach it yet risk can mean they go out of business. He said I’m fairly certain ”a few months of litigation won’t put Meta out of business.” /3
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(