• On CHOW: Girls who hate girly drinks
July 9, 2008 10:48 AM PDT

Senate questions privacy impact of Web monitoring for ads

by Declan McCullagh
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 7 comments

Monitoring customers' Web browsing to serve up targeted advertisements is coming under increased political scrutiny on privacy grounds, making the future of the controversial technique among Internet service providers less than certain.

A hearing convened by a U.S. Senate panel on Wednesday is the latest potential obstacle to widespread adoption of the practice, which relies on intercepting customers' Internet packets and building anonymized profiles that can be used for topic-based advertisements.

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., suggested that the procedure amounts to "wiretapping" and promised a followup hearing in the near future to explore the subject further. "We need to take a closer look at Internet users' privacy," he said.

It's like "you go to CVS and there's someone behind you making notes...and that becomes part of a data bank they send to someone," Dorgan said. "Someone is gathering information about where you travel and what you viewed and that goes into a data bank and can be sold or resold."

After pressure this spring from some members of the House of Representatives, companies including CenturyTel and cable providers Charter Communications and Wide Open West recently have suspended plans to use monitoring-and-ad-delivery technology from NebuAd, a secretive Silicon Valley start-up.

Mere speechifying by Washington politicians can't prohibit an otherwise legal product, of course. (If that were the case, surely some Democrats would have shut down ExxonMobil and some Republicans would have pulled the plug on Playboy Enterprises years ago.)

But the problem for NebuAd and its ISP customers is that--as we reported in May--a collection of federal laws written back in the 1980s create a treacherous legal landscape for broadband providers that are engaging in this kind of Web monitoring. Some of those laws restrict deep packet inspection by any broadband provider; the Cable TV Privacy Act singles out cable providers for the most extensive opt-in regulations.

For its part, NebuAd says it's doing nothing untoward. CEO Bob Dykes told the Senate panel that "my lawyers have told me we're in compliance with the law."

After being asked what would happen if the U.S. Department of Justice were to serve NebuAd with a subpoena asking for information about people who searched for explosives, Dykes replied: "We would not be able to provide names or even IP addresses."

NebuAd has repeatedly refused to disclose what advertising networks it uses or what broadband providers it counts as customers. It has said that it does not collect or use personally identifiable information and does not store raw data linked to "identifiable individuals." Rather, it says, it creates and continually updates anonymized profiles with information "about the user's level of qualification" for certain types of ads.

That nevertheless likely violates federal and state wiretap laws, unless customers give unambiguous consent to this eavesdropping on their Internet connections, says the Center for Democracy and Technology. CDT, which receives the majority of its funding from technology companies, published a report (PDF) on Tuesday that concludes: "Especially where the copying is achieved by a device owned or controlled by the advertising network, the copying of the contents of subscriber communications seems to be, in the absence of consent, a prohibited interception."

In addition, NebuAd has hired at least five employees from Gator, which changed its name to Claria five years ago to distance itself from associations with spyware. Symantec offers a Windows application that removes Claria's Gain software.

Dorgan said that he had invited a selection of unnamed broadband providers--presumably including Charter and CenturyTel--to testify at the hearing but they "declined the invitation." He promised a second hearing that would focus specifically on them.

Also on Wednesday, Dorgan wondered whether search engines "likely have information about where I've been traveling" on the Internet and mentioned hypothetical searches on WebMD about gout, dementia, and post-nasal drip. A representative from Google (Facebook and Microsoft also had representatives present) said the company doesn't know what people do when they're not using the Google.com site.

Declan McCullagh, CNET News' chief political correspondent, chronicles the intersection of politics and technology. He has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, "We oughta have a new federal law against this." E-mail Declan.
Recent posts from Politics and Law
What kind of virus has Fiorina's ad spread?
FBI wants records kept of Web sites visited
DOJ not pleased with latest Google Book agreement
Lawmakers grill execs over Comcast-NBC deal
U.S. House passes cybersecurity research bill
Web video gets H.264 royalty reprieve
Police survey provides glimpse of Net-surveillance figures
Government warns of looming cyberthreats
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (7 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
by georgiarat July 9, 2008 12:01 PM PDT
However, they are willing to allow an unelected judge turn over all your surfing activity on YouTube to Viacom.
Reply to this comment
by Digital_2008 July 9, 2008 12:59 PM PDT
Yep. They seem to be playing games with us and just pretending to be concerned about privacy. Same old crap, different day.
by jamalystic July 9, 2008 1:45 PM PDT
To free ourselves of these threats to Internet privacy and freedom we need a new business model where the consumer owns the last mile and is free to connect to any service provider he or she wishes at a neighborhood, carrier-neutral interconnect facility:Improving Internet Transparency( <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=506&#38;doc_id=154745&#38;F_src=flftwo" target="_newWindow">http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=506&#38;doc_id=154745&#38;F_src=flftwo</a>)
Reply to this comment
by chuck_whealton July 9, 2008 2:48 PM PDT
These guys seem to forget that just because something is legal doesn't make it ethical.<br /><br />That some providers were even considering using this type of technology is frightening. I guess people will do anything for $$$.<br /><br />Charles R. Whealton<br />Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com
Reply to this comment
by NewEnglander July 9, 2008 3:03 PM PDT
Yeah, well, legal and MORAL are two different things. <br /><br />I use Firefox for my browser. I may not be 100% safe from leeches, but I have my cookies set to accept ONLY site cookies (no third-party hangers-on) and I carefully pick and choose what scripts run by add-ons called NoScript and AdBlockPlus.
Reply to this comment
by mikeburek July 9, 2008 7:43 PM PDT
"you go to CVS and there's someone behind you making notes" - hmm, like a rewards card program available at CVS and many other stores?
Reply to this comment
by Mister L July 10, 2008 6:13 AM PDT
Yes like a rewards program you have to deliberatley sign up for. You know, like opting in.
Reply to this comment
(7 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
advertisement

Google's social side aims for some Buzz

Facebook and Twitter are the darlings of the social-media world, not Google--which hopes to change that with Buzz, betting it can organize your online social life.

Watching the birth of a gaming start-up

Stewart Butterfield and his friends are back at it with a new company. CNET's Daniel Terdiman was given exclusive, behind-the-scenes access as they built it from scratch.

About Politics and Law

News at the intersection of technology, politics, and law, ranging from intellectual property to censorship to tech policy.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Politics and Law topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right