Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
Summary: The Firefox team decided this week to stop collecting unique identifiers that link crash reports from the same user.During the somewhat heated debate during an extended session of its weekly meeting, opponents said the practice violates user privacy, while proponents say having the data visible could help them fix bugs and solve bottlenecks faster -- even though they claim to have never used it before.
The Firefox team decided this week to stop collecting unique identifiers that link crash reports from the same user.
During the somewhat heated debate during an extended session of its weekly meeting, opponents said the practice violates user privacy, while proponents say having the data visible could help them fix bugs and solve bottlenecks faster -- even though they claim to have never used it before.
Opponents won the debate by arguing that user privacy trumps any development issue. After the meeting, engineering chief Mike Beltzner summed up the issue this way:
"The discussion at the end of the meeting was around what data we should and shouldn't be collecting with crash reports, whether or not that data becomes publicly visible on our Crash Reporter developer website," Beltzner wrote in response to questions submitted by ZDNet. "The questions in the discussion centered around the value in keeping unique identifiers that allow us to associate two crashes from the same user.
"While there is value in being able to do this easily, the potential cost to user privacy felt high, and so some were arguing that we shouldn't have the crash reporter client on user's machines send these unique identifiers," he wrote. "That argument prevailed, and the change will be made such that unique identifiers will no longer be sent. We'll also purge the database of the ones we've collected (but not actually even used) to date and instead find new ways of drawing the correlations required for data analysis which don't have as high a risk to user privacy."
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Private should always be the primary concern
I understand and agree with the voluntary submission of crash data, as long as the user is given the choice to opt out.
-Mike D
http://www.daileymuse.com
Privacy is good...
The problem is, how do you link the crash reports together, without actually identifying the machine...
I don't have an answer off the top of my head, so I am happy that they put privacy first.
Kudos to the Firefox Development Team...
RE: Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
Firefox make an initial goob decision and everyone "understands" their position.
"Unique Identifier" vs "Personally Identifiable"
Any troubleshooting in a network environment should begin with "Are you the only one having this problem, or are others having it too?" When the fuse blows on the network printer, no amount of workstation troubleshooting is going to resolve it. On the other hand, if only one user is having the problem, especially repeatedly, then one needs to spend a little more time reviewing that user's workstation environment.
100 occurrences from the same workstation is not the same as 100 different users experiencing the same crash. I always assume that if I'm sending a crash report, some amount of identifiable information is being sent.
FF always prompts "Do you want to report the crash?" and gives a REAL Yes/No - if you say "no" then nothing is sent. That was always what I consider the "privacy" option. I just assume that if I say "yes", then some machine-identifiable environment information will be sent, to help analyze the problem. Not name/address/credit card or the like, but relevant environment information about the machine that led to the crash. Why make life more difficult for people who are trying to help us.
Bottom line is that kudos go to the Mozilla team for making their own work harder, but I for one don't see any major "privacy issue." I work a help desk and have several "frequent flyers" - and I've learned over time to look first at the things those users do wrong most often, when they call. ("Is there a red "X" on the network drive icon?") It saves a lot of time, for those who cause their own problems.
And thanks, Mozilla, for a GREAT browser.
PS - when I clicked "Submit" the first time, NoScript flagged a ZDNET Cross-Site-Scripting (XSS) attempt, and blocked the request. That's a perfect demonstration of why I LOVE FF! Thanks again!
well put
The only thing I can see along the lines of 'invasion' might be the ability to geographically locate someone. For example it is determined (via IP) the user spends certain hours at home and others at some other location. But that's a stretch.
But I'm not going to second guess those folks. Always better to err on the side of greater respect for privacy anyway.
You're the only guy so far who understands.
I assume this is why a UID was used in this case: it's anonymous and can't be associated with a real person. No name, no address, no phone number, no IP. Just a UID. Some sort of identifying information is necessary to correlate bug reports, for exactly the reason that Oldbaritone described, and if they can make it a unique identifier that preserves the user's anonymity, that's pretty much the Platonic ideal.
Any maintenance programmer who deals with bug reports (such as myself) would understand that. The Firefox team probably understands that just fine. They didn't do this to "preserve clients' privacy," because nobody's privacy can be violated by the method they were using. They did it to shut up the ignorant "privacy advocates" who, like most of the people who have replied to this thread so far, don't have the technical competence to understand what they're talking about and scream "Privacy violation!!!" as a knee-jerk reaction to just about anything. Accurately explaining the true situation requires a calm, rational explanation that takes a few paragraphs, and that just can't compete with a provocative sound bite. Sad, but true.
You have all missed the point
AOL made the same mistake:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal
If one of the pieces of data in the bug report is a memory dump, a cookie or a URL where the crash took place, then you are well on your way to discovering the users identification.
Re: You have all missed the point
If one of the pieces is a memory dump, then that's all they need. The UID provides NOTHING compared to a memory dump. And your name is likely to show up in a memory dump, so I don't see how it matters.
Regardless, the risk of a loss privacy is minimal, while troubleshooting an issue will now be harder.
He's not the only one
flamed to hell by the tin foil hatters though, lol.
you are correct
True that.
The privacy issues are vital but you have totally nailed it with "relevant environment information about the machine that led to the crash. Why make life more difficult for people who are trying to help us" - "environment" being the details about OS, hardware, other software, and many strictly technical nuances, none of which are directly lighting up the red blinking light over anyone's head in particular. No personal information is disclosed/collected, just the technical environment in which the crash(es) happened.
Yes, the privacy is very important but many people totally overdo it, and not only in the IT-related world. It's like a person is going to see a doctor, then he/she will refuse to tell where it hurts, LOL. The tin-hatters will always be paranoid and scream bloody murder so I'm glad the FireFox team has applied the good faith approach. They can collect my data if they want, I have nothing to hide :)
I couldn't agree more
Now they could get 30 crashes and they won't know if that's 30 different machines or a single machine (though I suspect htey could extrapolate that information by looking at the data sent back.
I'm a staunch privacy advocate, but this doesn't give me any more privacy....it just makes it harder to trouble shoot problems.
RE: Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
Earth to paul
LOL!
FF is not buying /selling users' information. They are trying to FIX FIREFOX CRASHES.
You wanted to sound so high and mighty that you totally missed the point.
RE: Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
My opinion is go ahead I'll let ya
RE: Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
RE: Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
RE: Firefox team stops collecting data to ensure user privacy
This is annoying, disruptive, and makes me look at chrome with loving eyes....