Google is preparing the FLoC, an update to its famous Google Chrome browser in which they will not accept any third party cookies
t has recently come out in the media that Google is preparing a major change to its famous CHROME browser that will consist of two key elements:
First You will only accept Google’s own cookies and not those of third parties.
Second Google cookies will use FLoC technology to filter users by cohorts or common interest groups.
Without a doubt, it may seem like an advance in privacy with respect to the current system where multiple companies develop their cookies (browser attachments with different functions) and generate their own user profiles in an absolutely decentralized system, Unlike Google, where the future model will be totally controlled by the Internet giant with no option to third-party participation in the segmentation of users.
It is clear that the current system of cookies may involve situations not wanted by the user and to avoid such situations the AEPD ,(we understand that with very good judgment) has required all website owners to allow the user to choose which cookies they accept or not before browsing a website. In this way, it is the user who chooses which level of privacy you want in the navigation within a web.
With the new model proposed by Google will not make sense such cookie settings, since only those that the dominant operator has developed for itself will be accepted, and surely the user when entering a website will only have to answer a binary question, that is whether or not I agree to enter the FLoC system.
The Federated Learning of Cohorts (FLoC) of Google, consists in identifying the user according to their tastes and browsing activity within a certain group or cohort, assigning a differentiated ID according to interests and profiles. In this way you don’t have an individual but a group with common interests with advertising segmentation that can be of interest at any time for advertisers and agencies.
At this point, we see some light and also some shadow, as a positive and interesting element in the improvement of privacy would highlight the lack of identification of the end user, that is, the FLoC system does not allow to identify users one by one as it happens now, would only be allowed to know which cohort ID belongs, without going into absolute anonymity, but blurred within a similar interest group. Undoubtedly, this layer of concealment, if well done can be an improvement with respect to privacy.
As shadows, the truth is that we are concerned that only Google can make Chrome cookies, a dominant operator with more than 90% of the Western market, is certainly a monopoly that goes beyond borders and states, while it is true that the fragmentation of the market made it more difficult to monitor and supervise it, It is no less true that the coercive capacity of the European Supervisory Authorities is much greater in these third party operators than they can in the face of Internet monsters such as Google.
The second shadow, is the alternative that Google gives us with its FLoC system to the personal identification of the user, the operator proposes us to classify by groups (cohorts in Google language) consumers, so that each user according to their behavior would be segmented and classified according to the pattern designed by Google.
It is clear that these patterns of conduct are of maximum interest to Google, and not precisely because of their altruistic spirit, but to market with them advertisers and advertisers with maximum efficiency and without competition, since only Google will have access to such profiles.
In short, it is not unreasonable to think that with the excuse of improving the privacy of your browser, Single-motion Google eliminates the possibility for third parties to extract commercial information from browsing by not accepting third-party cookies and also imposes the exclusive monopolistic system of segmentation of potential customers through its own and only cookies of the FLoC system... the truth is that it seems to us a monopolistic practice that can harm both users and other small developers in the advertising world who will see how they have to change all their patterns and economic investment, as always in favor of monopoly.
It is clear that all the European supervisory authorities are well aware of the ways in which the issue can be taken up, there is concern about the monitoring over time of users, consumption trends, the true anonymisation of the FLoC cohorts, the processing of specially protected data.
In any case, users feel the fight of David against Goliath, try to control through administrative procedures the giants of the Internet, It is not an easy task for any European supervisory authority, nor can it have an optimal outcome if there are no other complementary measures to promote competition and stimulate compliance.
In conclusion, we would like to restate a wish, now with more sense than ever, that the European Union must take a step forward in its Digital policy, it is clear that there is a common border, financial, goods and even external relations policy, but we miss the promotion of policies of digital independence similar to those undertaken by China in its day with BAIDO, ALIBABA, TACENT and XAOMI, and even Russia with YANDEX, certainly necessary alternatives and examples to follow if we are to have some European digital independence.
We will see in a few months where the FLoC evolves, we will be waiting and we will keep you informed.
A greeting.