1486955
story
Comments: 346 +- Your Rights Online: AOL Releases Search Logs of 657,427 Users on Monday August 07 2006, @03:41PM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicprivacy.gif); width:71px; height:53px;
privacy
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicaol.gif); width:60px; height:48px;
aol
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicstorage.gif); width:48px; height:51px;
storage
An anonymous reader writes "AOL has released the search logs of over 650,000 users for research purposes. This looks like it may become a public relations disaster for AOL, as well as a privacy nightmare for the users involved as Michael Arrington of TechCrunch notes: "AOL has released very private data about its users without their permission. While the AOL username has been changed to a random ID number, the ability to analyze all searches by a single user will often lead people to easily determine who the user is, and what they are up to. The data includes personal names, addresses, social security numbers and everything else someone might type into a search box." This is also being covered on The Paradigm Shift and Oh My News."
fantomas adds " Looks like they've just taken it down but it's still available on The Pirate Bay; not sure why but some of the academic researchers are going crazy musing the ethical aspects of letting the world know who's searching for how to kill their wives ..."
Update: 08/07 21:32 GMT by T : amromousa writes "AOL is now apologizing for the release ..., calling it a "screw-up," which they're upset and angry about."
Related Stories
Backslash: More on Leopard, AOL, Reuters and the Universe 117 comments
The 7 Ways That People Search the Web 239 comments
Ask Slashdot: Do You Allow Webmail Use on Your Network? 487 comments
We have art that we do not die of the truth.
-- Nietzsche
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
finally, maybe users will wake up (Score:5, Insightful)
Finally, for all my support nightmares AOL users I know (and there are many!) that I endured over the years, a misstep that may offend and bother them as much as supporting AOL has bothered me for the last bazillion years. Go away AOL! (But, leave a few of your coasters at the store counters, those did come in kind of handy.)
So, all of that aside (the court of public opinion stipulates AOL as stupid and insensitive), how equally egregious and offensive is others would propogate and perpetuate this misguided release of data? Any mirrors still carrying this information (and they are there) serves few purposes for continuing to provide access, and none are defensible: either they are happy and willing to allow potentially embarassing or damaging data to continue to be distributed, or they are sticking it to AOL when AOL has already fallen on their own sword -- enough is enough. It's not okay.
(So, how many wives are either not going to be home tonight, or are going to fix hubby his very favorite dish?)
Re:finally, maybe users will wake up (Score:4, Funny)
I bet the guy works for Rockstar games and is simply researching their next big hit. "Slap the Ho!" Where you put up with yo biotches shit till...
Parent
Re:finally, maybe users will wake up (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:finally, maybe users will wake up (Score:5, Funny)
You keep making oblique references to steak and cheese [urbandictionary.com]. I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.
(If it's 17556639's favorite dish, maybe his wife is looking forward to death.)
Parent
Re:finally, maybe users will wake up (Score:5, Interesting)
You're probably just trying to be funny, but this could be a real problem. I know I have had some seriously bizarre search historys when doing research on possible articles to write in my lame ass vanity site. They could very easily be taken out of context and used to make me look like a sicko instead of a cynic who wanted some of the bizarre material that non fiction can provide.
Maybe this guy is doing some research on a book. Maybe he's an artist doing some death metal band's cover. Hell, maybe they have a socially retarded CS major for a dorm mate and are trying to freak them out.
It's the ridiculous release of this type of data and the sensationalist warping of these smallest elements that allow our privacy to get train wrecked.
Parent
Re:finally, maybe users will wake up (Score:5, Interesting)
Who hasn't typed "how to kill your wife" into a search box by now anyway? (That was a joke! Hi honey!)
Parent
Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Who in their right mind would type their social security number in a search box, in plain text??? I mean, really???
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't it possible someone is searching for information on someone else? Checking to see if someone has listed their SSN else-where would help to narrow the scope of targets for data theives.
But yeah, you're probably right. Someone probably searched for their SSN to see if anybody who had taken it would use it somewhere in plain text, and assumed that the information they were passing to their trusted ISP was secure. Hah, imagine that, trusting a
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they want to be sure no one's posted it anywhere?
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Who in their right mind would give their SSN to AOL?
People really don't understand these issues.. I've this to be true recently when an HR person at my university asked me to send my SSN to her over email. Also, a couple weeks ago I booked a room at a hostel over the internet, and apparently I mistyped my credit card information, so they asked me if I could to to them again over email. You know, I just said "No, I'll call you." But it just goes to show that most people just don't even think about privacy issues. Even professionals who should know about these things. They just don't. Either that or they don't understand the technical side of it... like that email is not encrypted, etc.
As for search engines, I've no idea why you'd be searching for one on Google, unless for instance you wanted to see if your own was available somewhere--Which is funny, now that I think about it. How can you search for your own online information (to see what is out there) without giving it away yourself by typing it into a search engine?
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Interesting)
I send my credit card numbers over email all the time. But I only use "throw-away" numbers that are generated on the fly and can only be charged by a single vendor up to a specific amount (pre-set by myself). Most of the big card issuers offer a similar service for free (last I heard, MBNA, which has offered it for at least 5-6 years now, has not had a single instance of succesful fraud involving such throw-away numbers, never mind free, they ought to be paying me to use the service).
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've read of someone who tried it only to find that a group/department at his college had is SSN# posted
Of course, a partial SSN with a wildcard match might be a better idea.
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Funny)
Unfortunately, though, Google thought I was entering a subtraction problem. The answer was -966. Now go theft my ID
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Funny)
I know your SSN.
It's 000-00-0966!
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Interesting)
- Go to http://www.ssa.gov/employer/statewebcali.htm [ssa.gov] and pick an SSN prefix for a particular state (say, CA, which is from 545 to 573).
- Go to Google, click Advanced Search, and in "With all of the words:" enter "SSN".
- In "Return web pages containing numbers between" enter 545000000 "and" 574000000.
- Click Search and stare in horror all the student listings, bankruptcy filings, etc. posted with names, SSNs, addresses, etc.
I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this, but if you abuse any of this information, the Erinyes [wikipedia.org] will come after you!
Parent
Re:Searching for SSN's?? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Killing wives? (Score:5, Insightful)
If "End of the world" was searched for, how do you know if they are looking to the lyrics for an REM song, or trying to build a WMD?
it's a geographic location! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:it's a geographic location! (Score:4, Interesting)
It is 1.5 hours drive from where I live, and a really beautiful place.
More info here. [norway.com]
Furthermore, I just searched for "End of the world" on google...
Parent
Re:Killing wives? (Score:4, Informative)
His last search history is as follows, if he is writing a screen play, I don't want to see it!
17556639 how to kill your wife
17556639 how to kill your wife
17556639 wife killer
17556639 how to kill a wife
17556639 poop
17556639 dead people
17556639 pictures of dead people
17556639 killed people
17556639 dead pictures
17556639 dead pictures
17556639 dead pictures
17556639 murder photo
17556639 steak and cheese
17556639 photo of death
17556639 photo of death
17556639 death
17556639 dead people photos
17556639 photo of dead people
17556639 www.murderdpeople.com
17556639 decapatated photos
17556639 decapatated photos
17556639 car crashes3
17556639 car crashes3
17556639 car crash photo
Parent
Re:Killing wives? (Score:3, Funny)
What if he's searching for a story (Score:4, Insightful)
And especially pay attention to the last alternative: there are a lot of stories and sites that are just supposed to be obviously humorous, not actually to be a DYI guide to the subject in their title. E.g., I think there was a humorous site somewhere titled something like "how to pick up underage girls", or something to that effect, and it wasn't actually a paedophile's field guide. E.g., take sites like the Evil Overlord's List, which are just a parody of common movie cliches, not actually a guide to be followed by someone. (Unless they're writing a story involving a stereotypical Evil Overlord.)
So how do you know if that guy didn't google for the title of such a story? Or for some random phrase he remembered from one?
E.g., I remember reading an absurdist play by Eugen Ionesco about some murderer who tempted people to come see the colonel's photo, and then pushed them into some lake. What if I googled for that? Remember, I don't know the title of the play any more, so I can't just google for that. Not that it would make it any better, because the title IIRC was something about an unpaid assassin.
The whole thing didn't even make much sense, other than maybe as a metaphor for something or another. It's an absurdist play, so don't ask me for what it was a metaphor. It contained such gems as the everyman hero asking a police officer something to the effect of "and didn't you send cops to get him?" and getting an answer like "yeah, but they too wanted to see the colonel's photo." Nowhere does it say what colonel or what's special about that photo. I guess it wouldn't be absurdist if it did.
So if I tried googling for that play on the net, would you use your amazing deductive powers to conclude that I'm looking for a hitmal willing to do some pro-bono work? Maybe to whack-off some colonel?
Parent
Re:What if he's searching for a story (Score:5, Funny)
"A Do-Yourself-In guide"? I thought he was looking for help with murder, not suicide.
Parent
Re:Killing wives? (Score:3, Funny)
17556639 how to kill your wife
17556639 how to kill your wife
17556639 wife killer
17556639 how to kill a wife
17556639 poop
17556639 dead people
17556639 pictures of dead people
17556639 killed people
17556639 dead pictures
17556639 dead pictures
17556639 dead pictures
17556639 murder photo
17556639 steak and cheese
17556639 photo of death
17556639 photo of death
17556639 death
17556639 dead people photos
17556639 photo of dead people
17556639 www.murderdpeople.com
17556639 decapatated photos
1755
Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Hopefully Google takes note (Score:5, Funny)
This just in (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmm, I wonder if this "sorry" will be enough
Re:This just in (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Funniest thing so far (Score:5, Interesting)
A teacher's credit union employee was searching for sexy underwear, how best to conduct a relationship with a co-worker, and have sex in a pickup.
Just before that, she was searching for cars. And appears to have cancer as well, or lives with someone with cancer. Maybe it's her sick husband.
I wonder if that demonstrates why someone wouldn't want their Google searches or AOL info to make it into the public realm. AOL is obviously a bastion of consumer rights.
Re:Funniest thing so far (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe because AOL's privacy policy [aol.com] says so? First because it defines Member Information to include:
And then it says:
Parent
Re:Funniest thing so far (Score:5, Insightful)
Get down to the part about AOL Search, which has additional privacy terms. It is implied that they have your consent unless you opt out of the data collection.
Parent
Tracing back to a user (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tracing back to a user (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Tracing back to a user (Score:3, Informative)
988905: Brittney Spears
988905: Bill Clinton
988905: George Clinton
988905: George Clooney
988905: G. Stegman
988905: Mother Teresa
Guess!
The last nail in the coffin (Score:5, Informative)
Some intresting tidbits:
17556639 how to kill your wife 17556639 how to kill your wife
17556639 wife killer 17556639 how to kill a wife
17556639 poop 17556639 dead people
17556639 pictures of dead people 17556639 killed people
17556639 dead pictures 17556639 dead pictures
17556639 dead pictures 17556639 murder photo
17556639 steak and cheese
17556639 photo of death 17556639 photo of death
17556639 death 17556639 dead people photos
17556639 photo of dead people 17556639 www.murderdpeople.com
17556639 decapatated photos 17556639 decapatated photos
17556639 car crashes3 17556639 car crashes3
160689 light brown colored semen 3/2/2006 16:30 9 http://experts.about.com/ [about.com]
6497dog eat monkey5/22/2006 5:39
6497dog eat monkey5/22/2006 5:39
6497capuchin monkey dog5/22/2006 5:39
6497dog eating monkey5/22/2006 5:40
6497dog eating monkey5/22/2006 5:40
6497dog eating monkey5/22/2006 5:40
6497dog eats monkey5/22/2006 5:40
6497dog eats monkey5/22/2006 5:41
6497eating capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:41
6497eating capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:41
6497eating capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:41
6497kill capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:41
6497killing capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:41
6497slaughter capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:42
6497feeding capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:42
6497feeding capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:42
6497eyes capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:42
6497tail capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:42
6497tail capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:43
6497tail capuchin monkey5/22/2006 5:43
6497beach stud speedo5/23/2006 1:24
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:24
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:25
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:25
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:25
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:25
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:27
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:27
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:28
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:28
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:28
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:28
6497beach martin ricky5/23/2006 1:29
6497-5/23/2006 1:55
6497-5/23/2006 1:55
6497recent5/23/2006 1:55
6497speedo triathlete5/23/2006 1:55
3302children who have died from moms postpartum depression
3302children who have died from moms postpartum depression
3302rotovirus2006-03-24 19:55:12
3302statistics on infancide
3302statistics on infantcide
3302statistics on infanticie
3302statistics on infanticide postpartum depression
3302statistics on infanticide postpartum depression
3302statistics on infanticide postpartum depression
3302pictires of tom cruise and his wife
3302people magazines pictures of tom cruise and katie holmes
2652898my space.com (about 100 times)
2652898different ways to jerk of
2652898how to not ejaculate so early
2652898my penis has a big erection
2652898free videos of big dicks
Thanks to FARK.com for the snippits.
New data just released (Score:5, Funny)
Child Porn (Score:5, Insightful)
In Soviet....err...In America the government watches you! Ahh...how the times have changed...Working on losing the 1st Ammendment and 4th Ammendment in 8 years. As Thomas Jefferson said "The beauty of the 2nd Ammendment is that you don't need it until the government tries to take it away"... I recently had a picture taken of my baby girl at the National Archives with those 3 terribly important documents honestly wondering if they will mean anything or even exist by the time she is old enough to show her kids the picture.
But hey...may just be me being a pessimist...so maybe the spooks won't get up and arms datamining slashdot and seeing my TJ quote and come interrogate me for being a terrorist...just in case...
Last post!
14 download mirrors + BitTorrent link to the file (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.gregsadetsky.com/aol-data/ [gregsadetsky.com]
There are 14 mirrors listed there. They have all been added after this first mirror went live less than 20 hours ago.
I have already transferred 863Gb of data in that short period of time.
Re:14 download mirrors + BitTorrent link to the fi (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:14 download mirrors + BitTorrent link to the fi (Score:4, Insightful)
Nice to see you care so much about users' privacy that you're willing to distribute half a million users' private data.
Oh, but they're AOLers, so they don't have any rights. Rights only apply to the technologically literate, I suppose. Never mind then.
Parent
User 17556639 (Score:5, Funny)
FTA:
Mmmmmm. . . Steak and cheese. . .
Identifying some users is easier than others (Score:5, Funny)
13455621 funky gibbon
13455621 chair repairs seattle
13455621 addams family
13455621 OSS cancer
13455621 FUD spreading
Hypocrites (Score:4, Insightful)
Time to revisit "personally identifying info" (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in January, related to the story on how the DoJ demands and gets ISP data [slashdot.org], AOL had said that [informationweek.com] "We did not comply with the request made in the subpoena," spokesman Andrew Weinstein said. "Instead, we gave the Department of Justice a list of aggregate anonymous search terms that did not include results or any personally identifiable information."
AOL- you need to rethink that phrase personally identifiable, because it doesn't seem to mean what you think it means. You're hiding behind one technical definition of PII, without concern about whether or not the results actually have PII. If you're releasing results with personally identifying information, then you cannot say you're not releasing PII. I'd written in January [slashdot.org] I'd writen "I question this assumption by Yahoo, AOL, etc. that search terms, by themselves, have no privacy considerations because they've been separated from personal info. What if the search itself contains personal information? Are the search companies deleting the timestamps and randomizing the order of the search terms themselves? Because otherwise I could see personal info showing up." Obviously, half a year later, they still think that replacing a name with a number takes away the PII. They need to have a talk with, say, the Census Department, about why the department will withhold data [census.gov] about *groups* of businesses in a region. Grouped data can easily become PII data if you can tease out characteristics. AOL didn't even group the data!
As always, relevant quotes from the best.essay.evar on why privacy is a fundamental human right [privcom.gc.ca]: "If information that is actually about someone else is wrongly applied to us, if wrong facts make it appear that we've done things we haven't, if perfectly innocent behavior is misinterpreted as suspicious because authorities don't know our reasons or our circumstances, we will be at risk of finding ourselves in trouble in a society where everyone is regarded as a suspect. By the time we clear our names and establish our innocence, we may have suffered irreparable financial or social harm..."
"...agents of the state in Canada cannot order Canada Post to photocopy the address on every envelope we send, nor can they order bookstores to keep a record of every book we buy, let alone of every page of every magazine we leaf through. There is no reason why they should be able to exercise such powers with regard to every e-mail someone sends or every Web site he or she visits."
"I do not see any reason why e-mails should be subject to a lower standard of privacy protection than letters or telephone calls. And I do not see why Internet browsing should be subject to a lower standard of protection than book purchasing or researching in a reference library. Canadians should not be subject to greater state monitoring or scrutiny just because they choose to use new communication technologies."
Guess how many AOLers on Slashdot?? (Score:4, Funny)
Take a look here [ballofdoom.com] for the building archive.
Ok fess up.. WHO on here is using slashdot that is an AOL lover. For a long time we have poked jokes at AOLers but it seems they are in our midst.
package tracking numbers (Score:4, Funny)
user-ct-test-collection-01.txt:11218337 http to track the status of this shipment on line please use the following;http www.fedex.com tracking action track&tracknumbers
604041010003308 2006-04-28 18:31:15
This person lives in Stamford, CT and ordered a "SL150T-12 Battery" for Home Delivery (5.0 lbs.) [fedex.com] from california. Their barcode got messed up in-transit. Left at front door. Signature Service not requested.
user-ct-test-collection-01.txt:2433634 tracking 9102013196683232299662 2006-03-19 17:33:48
Your item was delivered at 8:54 am on March 24, 2006 in CROWLEY, LA 70526.
user-ct-test-collection-01.txt:5736530 ups tracking number 1z05r57w0299803522 2006-04-12 04:01:29
Delivered on: 04/12/2006 9:59 A.M. Delivered to: SOUTH BELOIT, IL, US Service Type: 2ND DAY AIR
user-ct-test-collection-01.txt:11989465 ups tracking 1z5628500342774976 2006-05-31 17:14:22
Delivered on: 05/31/2006 6:12 P.M. Delivered to: FORT WAYNE, IN, US Service Type: GROUND
user-ct-test-collection-02.txt:2103248 tracking 91025562344468252800 2006-03-02 02:11:13
There is no record of this item.
user-ct-test-collection-02.txt:2371993 tracking 1z7e49v20341755740 2006-05-08 12:22:41
Delivered on: 05/08/2006 10:25 A.M. Delivered to: BOTHELL, WA, US Service Type: GROUND
user-ct-test-collection-02.txt:2749649 usps tracking 9121010521297356081254 2006-04-04 17:11:49
Info has been stored off-line, but USPS will send it to your email
user-ct-test-collection-02.txt:5847446 www.ups.com and enter the tracking number 1z00v4270380899979 2006-03-18 16:53:15
Delivered on: 03/20/2006 2:56 P.M. Delivered to: TEMPLE CITY, CA, US Service Type: GROUND
There were about 120 searches for UPS "1Z..." numbers. I didn't bother parsing for USPS & UPS numbers, but there are plenty of those, too. I'm sure you'd be able to pull some names when the signature service is requested.
Re:Just like the Bush Phone Tapping (Score:4, Informative)
But wait, you were being sarcastic right?
Parent
Re:Just like the Bush Phone Tapping (Score:5, Informative)
Then you're an idiot. The info itself can contain private info, and being linked by ID makes it much easier. Imagine this set of searches:
Susan Smith phone number
britney spears
Smallville high school
shoe store near smallville
Smallville abortion clinic
dr. joe jones
6 searches and already we can assume the user lives in smallville, is young, knows susan smith, and is looking for information on abortions.
Now, if instead of 6, we had every search for a month or two. How much more information about this "anonymous" user do you think we could find?
Parent