Feeds

EU demands Google slashes cookie retention times

Six months is more than enough

The essential guide to IT transformation

An influential EC policy group, the Article 29 Working Party, is calling on search engines to delete users' cookies within six months - a much shorter period than that typically used by Google, MSN, and Yahoo!

Google volunteered to anonymise information held after 18 to 24 months following earlier EC concerns. After further negotiations with Article 29 this was lowered to 18 months. So the information was still kept but it did not include anything that could identify individuals.

Article 29 is made up of privacy regulators from member states - the UK is represented by Information Commissioner Richard Thomas. The review of search engines comes from an article, in English, on the Dutch Data Protection Authority website following the group's meeting in Brussels last week.

Although the group's advice is not binding it is likely to be broadly adopted by the European Commission.

The Working Party finds that search engines are covered by the Data Protection Directive. They must delete or anonymise personal data "once they are no longer necessary for the purpose for which they were collected". Search engines must also inform users of any third party use of their data.

The Working Party also warns that any "enrichment" of user profiles, with data not provided by the users, needs those users' consent.

Google says it keeps the information in order to improve search results - by identifying what you have previously searched for it can do a better job of fine-tuning future search results. It is also, of course, useful for targeting advertising.

On its public policy blog Google repeated the importance of data logs to improving its search service claiming that: "Today, a Google search is far more likely to provide you with the information you're looking for that it did a few years ago."

The search giant also disagreed with the policy group's view that IP addresses should be treated as personal information. Google blogged: "Based on our own analysis, we believe that whether or not an IP address is personal data depends on how the data is being used.".

Google wants the benefits of data warehousing - improvements in services - to be included in discussions of user privacy. ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
Britain's housing crisis: What are we going to do about it?
Rent control: Better than bombs at destroying housing
Top beak: UK privacy law may be reconsidered because of social media
Rise of Twitter etc creates 'enormous challenges'
GCHQ protesters stick it to British spooks ... by drinking urine
Activists told NOT to snap pics of staff at the concrete doughnut
What do you mean, I have to POST a PHYSICAL CHEQUE to get my gun licence?
Stop bitching about firearms fees - we need computerisation
Ex US cybersecurity czar guilty in child sex abuse website case
Health and Human Services IT security chief headed online to share vile images
We need less U.S. in our WWW – Euro digital chief Steelie Neelie
EC moves to shift status quo at Internet Governance Forum
Oz biz regulator discovers shared servers in EPIC FACEPALM
'Not aware' that one IP can hold more than one Website
prev story

Whitepapers

Endpoint data privacy in the cloud is easier than you think
Innovations in encryption and storage resolve issues of data privacy and key requirements for companies to look for in a solution.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Advanced data protection for your virtualized environments
Find a natural fit for optimizing protection for the often resource-constrained data protection process found in virtual environments.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.