Google`s Search Across Computers, a Privacy Faux Pas? - Examining the actual privacy threat
(Page 5 of 5 )
Having actually seen Google’s new tool, I want to take look at all the controversy that has come up around it. I already said that the EFF claims are overblown. After saying that it’s near impossible to keep SAC from activating and that it will gobble up all of your computer’s information (both untrue), they go on to say:
The government could then demand these personal files with only a subpoena rather than the search warrant it would need to seize the same things from your home or business, and in many cases you wouldn't even be notified in time to challenge it. Other litigants—your spouse, your business partners or rivals, whoever—could also try to cut out the middleman (you) and subpoena Google for your files. (Source: EFF)
It’s true that the privacy laws surrounding search engines are less defined than they should be, so the government might get away with only using a subpoena. However, a subpoena is still a court order and is not something a spouse or business rival can just randomly grab when they want to see what you’ve been up to. Keep in mind also that Google is currently fighting a subpoena from the government, which is only requesting statistical information on search queries (which does not even identify users or reveal personal information). The laws surrounding search engine privacy are vague enough that the case can go either way, and actual requests for personal information might even be harder to get past Google. This is not a problem with Google’s software or service, but a problem with outdated legal documents that need to be cleaned up.
The risk of subpoena is not a sensible reason for a home user to avoid trying out the software (unless you are into some really illegal stuff). You must opt in to everything Google sends to its servers, and the files are held for only 30 days. You have a lot of control over what is sent away, and Google makes it obvious. Nobody else sees your files, withholding the slim chance of a court order or your Google account being hacked. This is a possibility with storing information on any third party service.
However, the threat for enterprises is not Google, as much as it is careless employees. Since the employees are not handling their personal information, they may not care that they are logged into a corporate page that is not secure HTTPS while SAC’s Web history is activated. Even then, the information only spreads to employees’ personal Google accounts for a few weeks. No harm there, and they can even do work from home. Most employers like that idea. Of course, it is remotely possible a court order could turn up any data on the Google Desktop server, if the employee's Google account is discovered to be related to a company lawsuit. Then again, an employee could intentionally try to hurt the company simply by giving out their Google login and password (though an email attachment full of sensitive data can be just as damaging). That is just a risk an enterprise has to determine on its own.
There are certainly some great perks to using the software, because it really beats burning CDs or emailing text files. Everything stays up to date with very little effort too. But like most things, it comes down to your personal comfort level. When the service was first started, Google admitted:
"With everything, you trade privacy for a value-add," says Mayer at Google. "You want a driver's license? First, you have to tell the state what color your eyes and hair are. I view this the same way."
Says Weiner: "There will be confusion and concern about this initially, but people will be willing to accept it. Linking multiple devices will be greatly welcomed.” (Source: USA Today)
Google isn’t deceiving anyone. Personally, I don't feel this is much different from some things I'm doing online already. I have Gmail and Hotmail accounts which I use to send personal and work files. These face the same risks of being hacked or having a court order pull information from them. But neither has ever happened. These services are not the same, but the biggest difference between them is that the Gmail and Hotmail emails stay on the server indefinitely (thanks to high storage), which can be more damaging than my Google Desktop files that are only online temporarily.
It seems that more than anything, the trouble people are voicing about SAC comes down to needless Google bashing. This happened when Gmail came out, but now everyone has a Gmail account. Yes, there is some privacy trade-off here, but I'm saying that a lot of this controversy is exaggerated. And maybe this feature is useful enough to be worth the trade-off for many of us. After all, how many people will really try to break into my account to see what article is coming up on SEO Chat?
Search Engine News 
