First person identified from AOL Data: Thelma Arnold

August 8th, 2006 at 9:31 pm

I’m just curious as to how they would identify someone from such little information. It probably says in the article but I didn’t register for the site so I could read it.

Does anyone feel like informing the others in my boat and I on to how this was accomplished?

August 8th, 2006 at 9:45 pm

And people still don’t believe me when I tell them to be careful what they do with Google stuff

August 8th, 2006 at 9:57 pm

You know with all this talk about protecting privacy, it’s amazing how many outlets are willing to jump on the bandwagon and exploit this issue and exploit this woman’s privacy. The average techcrunch reader wasn’t going to go surfing through the data to try to sniff out the identity of a person, and frankly, the average techcrunch reader probably doesn’t care. So why bother to publish it?

August 8th, 2006 at 10:09 pm

TechCrunch is a travesty. I mean WTF?!

August 8th, 2006 at 10:30 pm

Are we missing some keywords? How can they track her from that?

August 8th, 2006 at 10:49 pm

Interesting to see how TechCruch legendary Googlephobie has mutated into an AOLphobie. Wait, AOL uses Google engine… So it’s stilll the ol’ Googlephobie.

Anyways, search engines aren’t the only ones keeping logs, I find ISP logs thousands of times more scary…

August 8th, 2006 at 11:05 pm

Lost in Brittany,

Phobias tend to be unwarranted anxieties. Considering this post is about an action that has already occured as opposed to a proposition or hypothetical situation, this is just plain reporting of actual facts. AOL really dropped the ball on this one and this mishap needs to be exposed. This is not about keeping logs as you have stated it…this is about publicly exposing the confidential information of your userbase. There is a glaring difference between the two. This really is a deplorable infraction by AOL.

August 8th, 2006 at 11:26 pm

Like what jbus said, it’s very important that TechCrunch was one of the major sites that brought all of this to our attention.

These are huge privacy concerns that the average public hasn’t understood. If enough talk continues, maybe something will actually happen. The only way to make people aware is for a spotlight to shine brightly over the implications of AOL’s “oversight.” Little accidents can ruin people’s lives, just from random people misinterpreting search terms. Combine that with other searches for names & locations, having nothing to do with the previous searches. Consider families who share a computer or roommates on the same connection — all of their dark-sided curiosities combined with one another. What about framing others? People with grudges could type others’ names + “impure” searches to bring guilt by association.

I imagine anyone who isn’t a prude or bland tends to momentarily wonder about various topics with queries that, at face value, sound twisted or odd. Imagine being judged just for being curious about life (something as tame as medical conditions to the diverse range of literature and depths of dialogue). The ability to have curiosity and freely explore information is the greatest ability of a free culture. When people become afraid of seeking information — from fear of being viewed as a criminal — it will set society back into repression and darkness.

The NY Times is brilliant for finding a real example so soon.

This type of user-connected data should not even be seen by licensed researchers. No searches should ever be logged in association with other searches except as a stored option for a search history made only available to that user. The future of search intelligence isn’t dependent on user-associated-searching to build blind profiles (which end up being grossly inaccurate). It’s more dependent on AI, document interpretation, web analytics, and natural language, along with an intuitive, desire-based interface that leads a person to the correct data.

I hope TechCrunch and all others continue to expose these major problems. TechCrunch deserves tremendous thanks for covering it. Thank you!

August 9th, 2006 at 12:20 am

Frankly, the most outrageous part of the story to me was that a 62 year old widow was using the internet! Who says there can’t be ajax websites for the baby boomers!!

August 9th, 2006 at 3:56 am

She should sue AOL.. can probably get an easy $500K.. it’s the American way.

August 9th, 2006 at 4:57 am

Way to go AOL! Selling out a little old lady! How long till some 14 year old’s data gets leaked.

Pathetic all around!

August 9th, 2006 at 5:41 am

That’s the greatest response from a company ever. I would sue.

August 9th, 2006 at 5:54 am

yeah.. web 2.0 is all about sharing data!!!!

August 9th, 2006 at 7:00 am

I am signed up for Google Search History. It is starting to seem like a very bad idea.

August 9th, 2006 at 7:05 am

“We apologize specifically to her…There is not a whole lot we can do.”

How about thinking before before doing soemthing completey and uttery cretinous?

August 9th, 2006 at 7:28 am

This is just plain scary. Take them to the cleaners old lady and teach them a very valuable lesson.

August 9th, 2006 at 8:22 am

Kudos to the community for exposing AOL’s stupidity; however, was it really necessary to keep on publishing the woman’s name?! Shame on you, New York Times!

August 9th, 2006 at 8:44 am

I think that it was very irresponsible of NYTimes (and Techcrunch) to post the id numer and name and etc etc of this woman. Even if NYTimes did find out one of people, shouldn’t they state that they IDed someone and then not release their info?

August 9th, 2006 at 8:53 am

This is why Google Desktop and Search History is a BAD IDEA.

Delete your cookies often, people. And above all, do not install any search toolbars.

August 9th, 2006 at 9:19 am

What do you guys think AOL could do about this now? Obviously they’ve learned their lesson.

Why this is up on TechCrunch? Not too sure.

August 9th, 2006 at 9:54 am

I’m with Red Willow, Tech and Brett.

Aside from AOL’s utter stupidity, the NY Times lives in its own world and plays by its own rules and enjoys its own intellectual ethics. (I’m also disappointed that Techcrunch would follow along and re-post her information.)

The reporter wanted to “make the story personal”. And yes, I’m sure they got her naive permission to run the story to get the word out.

So, Thelma, your reward for assisting the NY Times in further publicizing this story to educate their readers on AOL’s terrible decision…is that YOU are spotlighted, including specific, possibly embarrasing searches you performed and your response to questions about why you searched them.

Are these two reporters that awful at telling a story without stealing someone’s dignity?

August 9th, 2006 at 10:40 am

Great. Now we have ambulance chasers scouring the board.

What next?

August 9th, 2006 at 10:51 am

@Bob…”Dewey, Cheetum, and Howe” is a joke, my friend. But, to your point..I imagine there are some lawyers foaming at the mouth right now to cash in on this. Man..just when AOL had some signs of intelligent life.

August 9th, 2006 at 11:48 am

Is there a big law suit coming?

August 9th, 2006 at 2:05 pm

“# jbus

August 8th, 2006 at 10:19 pm

@ RedWillow

It sounds like she willfully cooperated with this story. I’m sure she was contacted about it first and gave her approval.

It’s important that people realize this data can be personally identifiable. I’m sure Mrs. Arnold realizes that and that’s why she agreed to be interviewed.”

Sure jbus, just like she unwillingly cooperated when AOL passed along her data.

August 9th, 2006 at 4:51 pm

One last thing.

Michael, you did the right thing in reporting on this and so did the NY Times taking the information and proving that the data was too detailed.

Those who would blame you for reporting this are mixed up on who to blame. Those blame lies squarely on the shoulders of AOL. You don’t blame the messenger.

This will not end soon for AOL and deservedly so!