How useful is Google Chrome's new Privacy and Security review tool?
Google is working on a new Chrome tool, called Privacy and Security review, which complements the browser's Safety Check feature.
Safety Check, designed to check standard protections, extensions, passwords, device software and updates, was introduced some time ago.
Privacy and Security review walks users through a series of configuration pages "hat helps the user to review various privacy settings" according to Google.
Privacy and Security review
The feature landed in Chrome 94 Canary, but it is disabled by default. To enable it, load chrome://flags/#privacy-review in the browser's address bar and set the experimental flag to Enabled. A restart is required before the change takes effect.
Once done, load the Chrome's privacy settings page, chrome://settings/privacy, or go to Menu > Settings > Privacy and security manually. The new Privacy and security review option is displayed at the top of the category.
Select "Let's go" on the page that opens. Chrome displays a single page at the moment for "search and browsing optimization".
The page has a toggle at the top to enable or disable the functionality, and explanation below. Explanations may include examples, and Google lists some of the data that is shared with it when the feature is turned on.
The review ends when you click on the next button.
It is almost certain that the feature is a work in progress. Chrome Canary is a development version, and it seems likely that new pages will be added to the tool before Google launches it in the stable version of its browser.
The option that is displayed on the first page is privacy related. Google's interest is in getting users to enable the feature, and it highlights the positive effect of it -- make searches and browsing better.
The downside, highlighted under "what you share with Google", is displayed on the page as well. In this particular case, Google is informed about any page you visit when using the browser.
Closing Words
Privacy and security review in its current form is not useful in its current form. It remains to be seen if new configuration options will be added to the tool before it lands in stable.
Google's main interest is data, and the design of the first page highlights the benefit of enabling the feature more than it highlights the downside of enabling it or keeping it enabled.
Ultimately, if privacy is a concern, it may be better to use a different web browser, Chromium-based or not, as many offer better default privacy protections or give you options to improve privacy.
Now You: would you use the new privacy and security review tool? (via Techdows)
Since when Google is very concerned about it’s customers for the terms of privacy….I am bit surprised…how FLoC is sealing as privacy….
Quite a day dreamer who even thinks it wil…be….
Also flags ..maybe good for browser but who knows what’s going on…
google + privacy = oxymoron
Haha?
More settings, please. A billion if it is possible.
If you take in consideration how this mofo companies are overcomplicating everything to their advantage to make you “give up” in the race to configure their services. Facebook is a clear example. Setting up their account is more complicating than installing and configuring an OS.
At some point, there should be a law forcing companies to provide a switch that opt out of everything without turning off option by option.
People need to bear in mind that this would be a ‘privacy from them’ option, not a ‘privacy from us’ option.
Yes, I believe that Googles Privacy and Security Review will be good for Google and its paying clients. Not me, nor the rest of us. If Google were serious about privacy it would have built in user adjustable tracker and ad protections long ago. Nor would it be using FLOC and anything else. It would require human review of any new extension submission and recheck them on occasion. Most likely this “security review” is a cheap way for them to find out what users are trying to do to circumvent Google’s hunger for our data.
g & privacy? This is laughable.
Any examples of what they are doing better?
The new tool does not offer any new features or options at the time; while there is a possibility, I would not hold my breath. Considering how the first, and only at the time, privacy option is worded, it is clear that Google’s main interest is in getting users to keep the option enabled that is worse for privacy.
On advancement of 92 ,The sandbx v2 has been released with its Google’s sweet cookie features which were they talking about months has been finally releasee The FLoC
Better is to ignore it…..
Now, what you’ve all been waiting for, an even more annoying seizure inducing Omnibox that flashes before you begin typing! We all love continual doses of self punishment; today the awesome new pain delivery feature you’ve been asking for is one step closer to arrival!
Exciting! Amazing browsing experience, even mind reading, is almost here. Hang on to your seats!
“Let’s go” to anything but Chrome.
How useful? Very. Google are doing much more for privacy than pretenders like Mozilla.
@IH
That human id thing is weird, it’s already being done if you have a phone; that being the fundamental issue with phones, impossible to make private legally. No idea what it’s supposed to do beyond what’s being done now.
Agree 100% that Mozilla’s projects are pointless replicates of things already existing such as MullVPNfox, whatever it’s called.
people feeding the troll as usual. mmmmm yes
@ChromeFan
If you think that Google cares about your privacy, you are frankly retarded. It is their very business to analyze everything you do only, to build a profile of you.
Likewise, the people who think that Mozilla cares about privacy are equally retarded. Mozilla supports efforts to assign a unique ID to every human being, this ID then follows you around the web, to combat wrongthink. Check this out:
https://human-id.org/
From the above link:
“Non-profit and open source, the project was started in 2018 by the Foundation for New humanID. With the help of Mozilla and Harvard, we’re on a mission to #FixTheInternet.”
“At humanID, we envision a social internet that serves businesses, users, innovators, and democracies. Imagine social media sites without predatory data collection, toxic algorithms and doxxing. Imagine a Facebook where real conversation takes place, a Twitter where facts prevail over fictions, a single, simple way to guarantee your privacy without having to juggle VPNs and Authenticators and DuckDuckGos and Telegrams.”
FYI, I support neither company. The difference seems to be that people know about Google already (except you, @ChromeFan), while there is very little known about the nefarious activities of Mozilla.
@Iron Heart You think I don’t know the things Google do?
Have you heard about the Regrets Reporter extension by Mozilla:
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/campaigns/regrets-reporter/
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/mozilla-investigation-youtube-algorithm-recommends-videos-that-violate-the-platforms-very-own-policies/
It is very laughable what Mozilla is doing.
>>> “this ID then follows you around the web, to combat wrongthink.”
Douchebag percentage runs through every topic …
@Emil Brausewetter
> a Twitter where facts (= the narrative) prevail over fictions (= anything not helping the narrative)
Totally not meant to punish wrongthink, yeah. You are willfully blind, that’s all.
Keep believing in Mozilla, fighter of the good fight.
What universe are you living in?
Yes, Google is doing much more for privacy. They are making very sure that no one has any left.
It wa a sarcasm? Or just kidding
May want to scrap the user name if shilling without snarkback is the goal.
Google and privacy? Yeah, sure, and my cat is a vegan activist.
net share
and security?browsing
Well, that’s a contrast with Google advertorial #200 by Shaun about Safety Check…
I don’t know about marketing man, but I’m dismayed by this sudden torrent of short, confused mini-articles about Android/Google which add very little value. In contrast to what has historically been a thoughtful and informative site.
This is written by Martin, not Shaun. You conspiracy people are something else, wow.
It’s the normal reaction now. People think that companies are a monolith and that everyone thinks the same like a bunch of robots. The same people get upset when you make the same accusations about them though. lol
Duh.