This is not a user first approach. Ad tech heavily relies on IP address for fingerprinting. Chrome will eventually implement IP Protection for incognito users. I believe Chrome originally planned to roll out IP protection for all users. https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection?tab=readme-ov-...
>Hi, connections through the proxies are encrypted multiple times to prevent Google from being able to access browsing data. In particular, the connection client-website is end-to-end encrypted, and so are the client-proxyA and client-proxyB connections. Because of this, the proxyA (operated by Google) will only be able to see the client IP address but won't be able to know which website is visited. The proxyB (operated by a partner) will be able to see the hostname of the website, but it won't know which client IP is accessing it. Neither proxy can see the URL nor the data due to the end-to-end encryption. With this design, no one - not even Google - can see who visited what website. Regarding log retention for the very limited information that we do have, let me confirm things internally and circle back.
IPv6 is more like /64 is an IP. Most ISP assign a /56 or /60 to the customer, you can just disregard all the other bits and basically have something like an IPv4 equivalent.
When you're going out of business[1], profits get a higher priority than anything in the ESG category. Like a lot of companies that have been successful for a long time, that will take time. But in the 15 years of watching them lose more and more 'margin' on the search ads business and the commensurate changes they have made to their core product, it doesn't seem like they are going to re-invent themselves.
For most profitable search categories (ecommerce etc) I can see LLMs taking over - ChatGPT with Search is already more reliable than Google, not to mention Deep Research
So I've read the article and I even read the Google post they linked in and yet can't understand what exactly are these changes.
It mentions fingerprinting but what exactly is Google changing ?
They speak about "advances in privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs)"
and then later on
"Internet Protocol (IP) addresses are already commonly used in the broader ads ecosystem to help marketers reach people across their customer journey and measure how their ads are working, especially on CTV. At Google, we have already been using these signals responsibly to fight against spam and fraud for years. Now, with new innovations like PETs to mitigate risks, we see an opportunity to set a high privacy bar on the use of data like IP. We can do this by applying privacy-preserving protections that help businesses reach their customers across these new platforms without the need to re-identify them. And because we’re looking to encourage responsible data use as the new standard across the web, we’ll also partner with the broader ads industry and help make PETs more accessible"
I consider myself fairly smart and used to read between the lines of the usual corporate bullcrap but here it's so convulated. That got to be a new high.
I think this should be interpreted as "we have become so good at identifying users without the traditional tracking signals that we are confident if privacy-preserving protections kick the industry in the nuts, it would massively lower CPI/CPC for all actors ... except Google", and therefore be really helpful.
So they will now do what they can to help anyone who claims "data like IP" needs strong privacy protections.
> These details along with someone's IP address - the unique identifier used by internet devices - were previously prohibited by Google for ad targeting.
I don't understand how fingerprinting can be used for ad targeting, however? Fingerprinting is used to build a profile, and you've always been able to target profile categories. Is this about targeting specific previous visitors to your website?
This article presents absolutely zero information about anything that has actually changed. It says:
> Changes which come in on Sunday permit so-called "fingerprinting"
But fingerprinting isn't something that is permitted or not. It just exists. It can't be stopped on the modern web.
If anyone knows what concrete change Google made that supposedly takes place today, it would be great to know.
From what I understand, and there's some extrapolation so I may very well be wrong, the difference here is that rather than basing targeting on identification cookies and Google Ad Id, they're now using stuff like fingerprinting and ip addresses to identify and cross reference people.
I find it so extremely disingenuous to call that "privacy enhancing technology" and lay it heavy on the fact that it's less intrusive, when the difference is that instead of inserting a tracker in your browser they do the same tracking without the tracker, and in a less bypassable way.
Readit News
(As a result of Google's antitrust infractions ad tech is going to become more competitive.)
No IP protection from Google and its CDN partners.
https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection/issues/34
Disclosure: I work at Google, but not on IP protection.
When I did a geoip lookup on my v4 address last year, it had me about 1.5 miles away from my apartment. When I did it on v6, it was within a block.
Using a VPN and NAT will still be useful for privacy with ipv6.
[1] Yes I know, people tell me all the time, Google's not going out of business! And I've responded that based on my observations it is, not like that authoritative or anything. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18179279 on this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18179176
Google search becoming antiquated in 10-15 years?
It mentions fingerprinting but what exactly is Google changing ?
They speak about "advances in privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs)"
and then later on
"Internet Protocol (IP) addresses are already commonly used in the broader ads ecosystem to help marketers reach people across their customer journey and measure how their ads are working, especially on CTV. At Google, we have already been using these signals responsibly to fight against spam and fraud for years. Now, with new innovations like PETs to mitigate risks, we see an opportunity to set a high privacy bar on the use of data like IP. We can do this by applying privacy-preserving protections that help businesses reach their customers across these new platforms without the need to re-identify them. And because we’re looking to encourage responsible data use as the new standard across the web, we’ll also partner with the broader ads industry and help make PETs more accessible"
I consider myself fairly smart and used to read between the lines of the usual corporate bullcrap but here it's so convulated. That got to be a new high.
Take a look here https://support.google.com/marketingplatform/answer/15732590...
Not sure even Gemini ai can unbullshitify that :)
So they will now do what they can to help anyone who claims "data like IP" needs strong privacy protections.
The key sentence seems to be:
> These details along with someone's IP address - the unique identifier used by internet devices - were previously prohibited by Google for ad targeting.
I don't understand how fingerprinting can be used for ad targeting, however? Fingerprinting is used to build a profile, and you've always been able to target profile categories. Is this about targeting specific previous visitors to your website?
This article presents absolutely zero information about anything that has actually changed. It says:
> Changes which come in on Sunday permit so-called "fingerprinting"
But fingerprinting isn't something that is permitted or not. It just exists. It can't be stopped on the modern web.
If anyone knows what concrete change Google made that supposedly takes place today, it would be great to know.
I find it so extremely disingenuous to call that "privacy enhancing technology" and lay it heavy on the fact that it's less intrusive, when the difference is that instead of inserting a tracker in your browser they do the same tracking without the tracker, and in a less bypassable way.
Google always has this info. Now they are going to share it with their customers.
I'm shocked.
Why did HN Submit not notice, I wonder.
A public company like Google doesn’t have to put profit first - but without competition there’s not much else to go for.