Yes, that is in fact the subject of the lawsuit. From literally the first sentence of the article:
> alleges the Silicon Valley giant misled the public about how much data it collects from users even when they're in its Chrome browser's "Incognito" private browsing mode.
The accusation is that Google is leveraging Chrome to track you even in incognito mode, and it does not give any notice that it is doing so. It warns about the websites you visit, about who owns your local network, and about the ISP, it doesn't warn that Google is still actively tracking you in incognito.
Can you explain how Google tracks users in incognito mode outside of the websites they visit? If there's no client-side Chrome telemetry in incognito mode, why should Google be special-cased when all ad networks can do the same thing that Chrome caveats explicitly?
- Google Chrome won't track you in Incognito mode.
- Google Analytics javascript (if added by the webmaster to their site) will track you in any mode.
So the lawsuit is saying, "Google promised us that Incognito would let us browse privately, but Google is still tracking us". To me, they're really muddying the waters here, because clientside Chrome doesn't track you, but, doubleclick on a website, will still track you.
According to this lawsuit, Google's biggest sin is saying "Now you can browse privately..." but when you open Chrome Incognito it clearly says "Your activity might still be visible to websites/employer/ISP"
Kind of a weak case for the plaintiff, and a weak article (engineers joked about the icon? and wanted to change the name? It's definitely a shitty name but this article makes it sound like this a smoking gun.)
> 2. Google's Alleged Collection of Plaintiffs’ Data
> Plaintiffs allege that Google collects data from them while they are in private browsing mode "through means that include Google Analytics, Google ‘fingerprinting’ techniques, concurrent Google applications and processes on a consumer's device, and Google's Ad Manager." Id. ¶ 8. According to Plaintiffs, "[m]ore than 70% of all online publishers (websites) use one or more of these Google services."
> Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that, whenever a user, including a user in private browsing mode, visits a website that is running Google Analytics or Google Ad Manager, "Google's software scripts on the website surreptitiously direct the user's browser to send a secret, separate message to Google's servers in California." Id. ¶ 63. This message includes six elements, each of which is discussed below.
[...followed by a lot of detail on what gets tracked...]
So there is client-side telemetry which completely de-anonymizes and geolocates you and Google tracks you in incognito mode everywhere that Google Analytics is deployed (~70% of the web). If you use incognito mode and visit porn sites that use Google Analytics, then Google has your complete de-anonymized porn surfing history in their databases. This is not what people are led to believe is happening by the incognito warning message.
> whenever a user, including a user in private browsing mode, visits a website that is running Google Analytics or Google Ad Manager, "Google's software scripts on the website surreptitiously direct the user's browser to send a secret, separate message to Google's servers in California."
Which part of this indicates that the Chrome client contains code giving Google special privileges to track users in incognito mode that other websites don’t have access to?
>Google's software scripts on the website surreptitiously direct the user's browser
is referring to JavaScript. Any other analytics platform could (and does) do the exact same thing.
You claimed something was there, the burden is on you. The allegation is Google, through a combination of data collected from you Incognito browsing session and non-incognito data collected from other Google apps that happen to be running on the same device could be enough to deanonymize you. There is nothing at all alleging they use Chrome. Even the most egregious X-Client-Data header is called out as specifically as not sent in Incognito.
How is it client side telemetry when the exact same things would happen in edge, Firefox, Opera etc. with or without private browsing turned on. All of what you listed has zero to do with Chrome.
You're misreading or misunderstanding. It's not your fault, the plaintiff is taking great pains not to say "Google Chrome sends this data" and make it unclear.
Every source about this lawsuit has said that what is meant by this is Google tracking you on Google properties. Unless they outline how the tracking is done it’s pointless.
> through means that include Google Analytics, Google ‘fingerprinting’ techniques, concurrent Google applications and processes on a consumer's device, and Google's Ad Manager…
So not using Chrome. They’re arguing that Google is collecting the usual web tracking and that other Google apps a user might have collect user data.
> alleges the Silicon Valley giant misled the public about how much data it collects from users even when they're in its Chrome browser's "Incognito" private browsing mode.
The accusation is that Google is leveraging Chrome to track you even in incognito mode, and it does not give any notice that it is doing so. It warns about the websites you visit, about who owns your local network, and about the ISP, it doesn't warn that Google is still actively tracking you in incognito.