Google less privacy aware than Facebook?

Google less privacy aware than Facebook?

Summary: Google+ encourages users to give out information that could compromise their security and its privacy selling point — its circles — are actually a subset of Facebook's friends lists, according to researchers from the University College London in the UK.

SHARE:

Google+ encourages users to give out information that could compromise their security and its privacy selling point — its circles — are actually a subset of Facebook's friends lists, according to researchers from the University College London in the UK.

(Facebook privacy image by
Sean MacEntee, CC2.0)

In their paper, Preliminary Analysis of Google+'s Privacy (PDF), the two researchers, Shah Mahmood and Yvo Desmedt, compare some of the privacy features of Facebook and Google+, including the use of friends lists and circles to maintain privacy settings.

They claim that "Facebook lists are a superset of Google+ circles, both functionally and logically, even though Google+ provides a better user interface". The pair highlight that the main difference between the two social networks is the possibility of exclusion. Under Google's currently implementation, if a user had arranged users into a "Friends" circle with some of those people also included in a "CoWorkers" list, it is not possible to send content to "Friends" while excluding "CoWorkers" who may also exist in the "Friends" list.

The researchers said that the ability for Facebook to do this made it more robust than Google's circles.

"In Facebook, we can limit access of our content to a list which is subsets of a set of lists with whom the content is shared. This means, we can share a message with a list called "All" (containing all our contacts) and still make the content [invisible] to our "CoWorkers".

Another privacy concern raised by the researchers was how Google+ extracts metadata from photographs uploaded to the social media site. As an example, the pair showed they were able to identify what camera Google co-founder Larry Page uses. They said that knowing this level of detail could be a concern, given there have been past incidents where victims were killed for their cameras. In some cases, cameras are worth thousands of dollars.

Further, cyber-stalking behaviour is encouraged through the information that Google+ encourages users to provide. When filling out a Google+ profile, the "Other Names" field encourages users to fill out their maiden name or alternate spellings of their name.

"Messages, photos and comments on social networks and other online sources can be used to infer family relationships," the paper stated, adding that mothers' maiden names are a common secret question for verifying identity.

But the paper wasn't entirely negative towards Google's social media platform. It noted that Google+ employed full-session encryption while Facebook only did so for user authentication, making Facebook more prone than Google+ to a man-in-the-middle attack where hackers could intercept user traffic to view or modify the content.

It also noted that Google has granted users a greater number of options for handling content once it is uploaded to its social network. Comments on posts can be temporarily disabled, while Facebook's controls require blocking a user from their entire wall. Sharing, similarly, can be disabled to stop other users from easily re-sharing content.

Finally, the research noted that users can retroactively edit their comments on Google+, which is time-stamped — neither feature is possible on Facebook.

Topics: Google, Privacy, Security, Social Enterprise

Michael Lee

About Michael Lee

A Sydney, Australia-based journalist, Michael Lee covers a gamut of news in the technology space including information security, state Government initiatives, and local startups.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

4 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • There is actually a very good reason to not allow editing of your comments and posts like Facebook chooose to not allow. You don't want someone posting "I love puppies" and having lots of people "like" (or +1) the comment, or post a comment saying "Me too!" and then later change it to "I really think that Hitler was doing the right thing."
    jkfan87
    • I will say that I wish Facebook DID allow for a limited time only editing period. Say, 2-3 minutes. Or maybe as long as there is no other activity in the thread. So, as soon as someone comments after you, or likes your comment/post, you are locked into that post.
      jkfan87
    • I agree with both your points. This is definitely an issue, but there are different solutions Facebook and Google+ could try.
      MosaicTechnology
  • Google would be smart to quickly fix these issues. If it wants to be a strong competitor to Facebook, it has to be bigger and better than Facebook ever was. Privacy has long been one of Facebook’s most criticized issues, and if Google+ can’t offer a better alternative, people will be less inclined to make the social network switch.
    MosaicTechnology