{"id":14042,"date":"2022-02-16T21:37:06","date_gmt":"2022-02-16T21:37:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/02\/16\/google-wants-to-build-a-private-advertising-system-for-android\/"},"modified":"2022-02-16T21:37:06","modified_gmt":"2022-02-16T21:37:06","slug":"google-wants-to-build-a-private-advertising-system-for-android","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/02\/16\/google-wants-to-build-a-private-advertising-system-for-android\/","title":{"rendered":"Google wants to build a private advertising system for Android"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n
<\/p>\n

\n

Google announced in a blog post<\/a> on February 16th that it plans to build a \u2018Privacy Sandbox\u2019 for Android.<\/p>\n

While some initial coverage has drawn comparisons to Apple\u2019s App Tracking Transparency feature<\/a>, it\u2019s worth noting that, at least for now, Google\u2019s Privacy Sandbox isn\u2019t even close. Mostly, that\u2019s because it doesn\u2019t exist, and it won\u2019t for several years.<\/p>\n

Instead, the blog post is an announcement of Google\u2019s \u201cmulti-year initiative to build the Privacy Sandbox on Android,\u201d and the company says it will work with the advertising industry and regulators while developing Privacy Sandbox. The search giant also indicated the goal with Privacy Sandbox is to create private advertising solutions that \u201climit sharing of user data with third parties and operate without cross-app identifiers, including advertising ID.\u201d<\/p>\n

Further, Google\u2019s blog post calls blunt approaches \u201cineffective:\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWe realize that other platforms have taken a different approach to ads privacy, bluntly restricting existing technologies used by developers and advertisers. We believe that \u2014 without first providing a privacy-preserving alternative path \u2014 such approaches can be ineffective and lead to worse outcomes for user privacy and developer businesses.\u201d
<\/em><\/p>\n

Google then cites another blog post<\/a> that explains how Apple\u2019s App Tracking Transparency doesn\u2019t help cut down on tracking. However, it\u2019s worth noting that App Tracking Transparency was never going to stop tracking \u2014 all it does is prevent access to an Apple device\u2019s \u2018Identifier for Advertisers\u2019 (IDFA). As previous reporting has shown<\/a>, any app that wants to keep tracking users can leverage other data from a device to develop a unique fingerprint. Then the app can use that fingerprint rather than the IDFA.<\/p>\n

Can privacy and ad tracking co-exist?<\/h2>\n

With that in mind, it\u2019s not entirely fair for Google to use Apple\u2019s flawed approach as the basis for pursuing a supposedly private form of tracking (because, frankly, that\u2019s what this appears to be). Apple didn\u2019t implement a blunt solution that blocked all <\/em>trackers \u2014 it just removed one possible tracking option.<\/p>\n

While Google\u2019s goal is arguably good, I\u2019m not sure how effective it will be at creating a private advertising system.<\/p>\n

When it comes down to it, I don\u2019t think you can target ads at users while maintaining user privacy. Google has already tried and failed to develop ways to privately track users \u2014 for example, Google abandoned its \u2018FLoC\u2019 plans for Chrome earlier this year<\/a> for a new \u2018Topics\u2019 API. Topics will generate five interests for users based on their web activity and show those to advertisers when that user visits a website. That already sounds like a privacy nightmare to me, even if it is an improvement over FLoC.<\/p>\n

Maybe there\u2019s an easier way. Instead of targeting ads based on user interest, serve ads based on content. For example, show tech ads on a tech news site. That requires no tracking of user activity, and you\u2019ll serve ads to people interested in that topic. I\u2019m sure there are other solutions out there that also don\u2019t require tracking of any kind, whether or not it\u2019s \u201cprivate.\u201d It\u2019s a question of whether the big players are actually willing to abandon tracking.<\/p>\n

Source: Google<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n