Google Updates

LinkWorth

2008-04-25T00:42:00.000-07:00

LinkWorth is one of the web's largest and most innovative marketing portals that caters to both Advertisers and Partners. They have a multitude of products and services to fill your every online marketing need.

They products consist of text link ads, paid blog reviews, in-text links, in-content pay per click ads, rotating text ads, hosted content pages, article submission, directory submission and many more.We highly reccomend checking out Linkworth and see if you can increase your web traffic and revenue.

LinkWorth for Advertisers:

Buy ads and increase traffic, visibility and search positions
SEO/SEM Consulting, Reputation Management
Article Distribution, Directory Submission, Press Releases, Custom Content & more
Huge inventory of publishers growing daily
Perfect backend for Agencies to White Label or Add-on to existing services
Use our Control Center to manage one or all of your accounts with one login

LinkWorth for Partners:

Sell ads and monetize your site with relatively little maintenance
Earn up to 70% of ad revenue recurring monthly in most situations
Get paid to blog and write reviews for products & services
Tons of advertisers, from Fortune 500 to small businesses
The more websites you list, the more money you earn
Manage all of your published ads and websites with our Control Center

Payment: Check, Wire transfer, Paypal
payout: %70
minimums: Partner websites must be complete with working pages and links between pages. Submissions must be a unique domain that is owned by the Webmaster and easily maintained. Listings that reside on free web servers that result in long and confusing subdirectory URLs will be declined.

VISIT SITE AND GET MORE DETAILS

Google AdSense

2008-04-25T00:38:00.000-07:00

Google AdSense is a fast and easy way for website publishers of all sizes to display relevant, unobtrusive Google ads on their website's content pages and earn money. Because the ads are related to what your users are looking for on your site, you'll finally have a way to both monetize and enhance your content pages.

It's also a way for web site publishers to provide Google search to their site users, and to earn money by displaying Google ads on the search results pages. The program is free, and combines pay-per-click and pay-per-impression advertising - meaning you get paid for valid clicks on the ads on your site or search results pages as well as impressions on your content pages. So go ahead and try this program. If you comply with this program policies, just complete online application and select either or both of AdSense for content pages and AdSense for search. One application gets you approved for both AdSense and AdSense for search - you can decide to use any combination of these products on your pages.

Google will review your application and follow up with an email within 2-3 days. If you are accepted into the program, you can log in to your new account and get the HTML code to insert into your web pages.

Earning Types: CPC, CPM, CPA

Payment: Check, EFTAd

Types: Text, Image and Video based ads are available. Different ads on will pay different CPCs (EG Debt Consolidation CPCs might be $5 while game site CPCs might be $0.02)

payout: %40 - %70

following these simple rules will help keep your account in good standing: 1.Don't click on your own Google ads.

2.Don't ask others to click on Google ads.

3.Don't employ pop-up prompts or automatic software installations.

4.Be aware of how your site is promoted.

5.Don't place Google ads on sites that contain prohibited content.

6.Respect Google trademarks.

7.Don't tamper with the AdSense code.

8.Provide a positive user experience.

9.Provide a good environment for advertisers.

10.Be responsive.

11.Do not mask ad elements.

12.Do not place more than 3 ad units and 3 ad links or 2 adsense search boxes on any web page.

13.Do not run competitive contextual text ad or search services on the same site.

14.Never launch a New Page for clicked ads by default.

15.Place ads only on Content Pages.

16.Do not alter the results after ad clicks or searches

Microsoft takes on Google with web-based Office

2008-03-03T22:50:00.000-08:00

Some of Microsoft's most lucrative consumer and enterprise products - including Office - will be available on the web

Microsoft has launched its most audacious attempt yet to seize the initiative back from Google in the race to harness the internet as the computing platform of the future.
The software giant announced that from today, one of its most lucrative products, the Office Suite, will be available online, meaning that consumers will be able to create, write and store Word and other documents on the web.
The release of a web-based version of Office comes just a day after Microsoft said it would offer web-based versions of some of its enterprise products, including the e-mail program Exchange, meaning that companies will no longer have to buy expensive servers to run their employees' e-mail accounts. Instead, their workforces will be able to access e-mail stored on Microsoft's servers.
Microsoft's aggressive foray into the new web-based model of software delivery marks yet another attempt to catch up with Google. Its great rival has already launched a suite of Office-like applications, called Google Apps, which allows users to create and store documents online.
Microsoft, which is also still fighting a battle to seize control of Yahoo! following a $45 billion takeover bid, is concerned that Google is well placed to exploit the new trend of delivering software via the internet, having already stolen a sizeable lead in the the market for online advertising.
One of the new Microsoft products, called Office Live WorkSpace, allows people to create and store Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, and PowerPoint presentations online, and share them with friends and colleagues. The idea is that if the documents are stored online, they can readily be accessed on any computer, and can also be shared with others without having to be sent around as e-mail attachments.
Similarly the new version of Exchange will mean that companies can manage their employees' e-mail accounts as well as calendars, contact lists, video conferencing and other functions without needing to buy an expensive server that sits on their premises.
Microsoft has not disclosed pricing for its new enterprise software, but according to an analyst at Gartner, the typical cost to a large company of buying and running a Microsoft server is $9 per user per month. By comparison, Google's suite of products for businesses, which offers e-mail as well as document and spreadsheet programs, costs $4 per user per month.
It is unclear whether Microsoft will change the licensing fee it charges for Office - which is recouped when consumers buy a computer - now that the program is available online, though analysts have suggested that the effect of the new offering is likely to be "revenue neutral."
In the most recent quarter, licences for programs such as Office 2007 and Windows Vista accounted for 56 per cent of Microsoft's revenues, which were $16.4 billion.
"This is the start of a fundamental shift in the way computing is done," Matt Cain, a senior e-mail analyst at Gartner, said. "For the last decade and a half, Microsoft has had a near monopoly on the whole software market. Now that an alternative model is emerging, we're starting to see new vendors enter the market, namely Google, and Microsoft is going to have to fight tooth and nail to hold its position.
"There's still going to be a predilection among consumers for brands like Outlook, Word and Excel, because consumers are familiar with them and because - from a technical point of view - they're still better than the other offerings, but Google is going at 100 miles an hour to catch up."
Last week, Google ratcheted up the pressure on Microsoft with the launch of Google Sites, a program which which allows employees to create websites on which they can present documents as well as videos and other material, and which will sit alongside other programs in the Google Apps suite.
More than 500,000 companies have already signed up for one of the free or paying versions of Google Apps, and about 2,000 new organisations are signing up each day, Google said.
The emergence of the model for software delivery where customers pay a monthly subscription to access programs - rather than a licence fee for every copy they buy - has sparked a flurry of acquisitions among larger software firms as they put together new web-based portfolios of products.
Last month, Dell bought MessageOne, a provider of online e-mail archiving and management services, for $155 million.
In September, Yahoo! bought Zimbra, a web-based competitor to Microsoft Exchange, for $350 million, and Google bought Postini, the e-mail filtering and security firm, for $625 million. In March last year, Cisco, the networking equipment firm, bought WebEx, a supplier of online conferencing software, for $3.2 billion.

Run, Microsoft, Run!

2008-02-26T07:31:00.000-08:00

I've got one piece of advice for you, Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT): Run!
Don't you dare come back to Yahoo! (Nasdaq: YHOO), holding the boombox over your head all Cusack-esque. Blasting Peter Gabriel won't win you Yahoo!'s greedy heart. It's just not worth it, even if you succeed.

You've overpaid for aQuantive and your wee stake in Facebook. Don't make an even bigger mistake by paying more than you have to for Yahoo!. Mr. Market is telling you that. Your market cap has been privy to a $42 billion haircut since you made the offer. How much deeper are you willing to slice your existing shareholders, just to chase down a company that would bring a ton of page views to the table, but remains somehow unaware of its actual market worth?

That scissor snip even means that the $31 offer being bandied about is already obsolete. The cash portion is locked at $31, but the share exchange portion is now valued at a mere $26.82 apiece. In sum, that $31 deal now has a market price of $28.91.

Funny how the market wants to know whether you'll miraculously bid against yourself, whipping up an offer of $35 or $40, when you're no longer even good for the initial $31 handshake.

Don't scratch your head. Don't plead your case. Just run away.

Let Yahoo! play Wile E. Coyote
Yesterday's market reaction left me dumbfounded. Your stock fell, with investors no doubt fearing that you would drum up the courage to up the ante back to $31 or higher. Yahoo!'s shares rose, with Yahooligans assuming that a better deal is on the way.

If I'm right,
history will point to yesterday's trading in Yahoo! shares as the equivalent of those moments in the Roadrunner cartoons where Wile E. Coyote doesn't realize that he just walked off a cliff -- until he looks down, and gravity takes hold.
I'm not sure whether it will be a falling anvil, a painted rock, or simple gravity that whacks Yahoo! shareholders back into reality, but it's probably going to leave a mark.

I hope I'm wrong
I don't want to be right about this. I think CEO Jerry Yang's heart is in the right place. I believe in the hype that bills Yahoo!'s Sue Decker as one of cyberspace's most promising executives. In an ideal world, the market could forget that the past week and change ever happened. Yahoo!'s stock would be back in the high teens, with dreams of gradually clawing its way higher. Shareholders wouldn't be happy about their paper losses, but they would be somewhat patient.

Unfortunately, investors won't easily forget that Microsoft offered nearly $45 billion for what the market felt was a $26 billion company. Yahoo! can't go back. With Microsoft unlikely to budge beyond its initial offer -- which is now less than Yahoo!'s current price -- Yahoo!'s stock can't move forward.

"After careful evaluation, the Board believes that Microsoft's proposal substantially undervalues Yahoo! including our global brand, large worldwide audience, significant recent investments in advertising platforms and future growth prospects, free cash flow and earnings potential, as well as our substantial unconsolidated investments," the official Yahoo! response reads.

Implying that the offer "substantially undervalues" Yahoo! is a thinly veiled invitation for a higher offer, so that the company can go out on its own terms. This kind of tactic would work if Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL) were doing the bidding, but Larry Ellison's nowhere near this one. And Yahoo! isn't as hot as it thinks.

Is Yahoo! even aware of how poorly it's faring in some of the metrics it held out as valuation standards? Future growth prospects, free cash flow and earnings potential? It can't be serious. Earnings potential? Net income dipped last year, and Wall Street expects it to dip slightly again in the year ahead. Free cash flow grew all of 6% last year, while revenue grew by 8%. Wall Street's looking for an 11% revenue advance this time around, but how much of that will be organic? Last year's shopping spree padded Yahoo!'s results with the acquisitions of Right Media, BlueLithium, and Zimbra.

Would you pay 67 times forward profitability for that kind of laggard? That's what Microsoft offered two weekends ago, offering to substantially dilute its existing shareowners for the thrill of closing in on Google (Nasdaq: GOOG).

What were you thinking, Microsoft? And now that the market is giving you the perfect opportunity to rescind your offer and recover tens of millions in squandered market cap, why stick to your guns when Yahoo! is firing blanks?

The last word until the next word "We are offering shareholders superior value and the opportunity to participate in the upside of the combined company," countered Microsoft in its response.

Oh, great. This is like the lamest Wrestlemania event ever. In one corner, we have Superior Value. In the other corner, hailing from parts unknown, we have Significantly Undervalued.

The rub here is that Microsoft's clearest path to acquiring Yahoo! on its own terms would be to take back its offer. If the market felt that it was serious in rescinding the deal, Yahoo!'s stock would sink back down, forcing shareholder upheaval.
Every company isn't for sale, but now that Yahoo! investors have tasted the high $20s, it will be hard for them to settle for what the market feels a non-acquired Yahoo! is really worth.

So walk away, Microsoft. Lace up those shoes and go. Let Yahoo! become the next Circuit City (NYSE: CC). The consumer-electronics chain turned down buyout offers at $8 in 2003 and $17 in 2005, only to trade considerably lower today.

You've still got the greenbacks to pick up a few consolation prizes, like Ask.com parent IAC (Nasdaq: IACI) after it splits into five subsidiaries. Or you could dabble overseas by snapping upBaidu.com (Nasdaq: BIDU) to rule paid search in China, or MercadoLibre to control online marketplaces in South America.

Let Yahoo! executives deal with the wrath of angry investors. If the pieces you covet remain intact after dissidents take a battering ram to the boardroom, you can always come in with an offer that your shareholders -- not Yahoo!'s shareholders -- can live with.

Is Google Lying Again?

2008-02-26T07:29:00.000-08:00

I find myself questioning Google's (Nasdaq: GOOG) actions lately.
Actually, let me retract that statement. I know exactly what's driving Google's response to Microsoft's (Nasdaq: MSFT) play for Yahoo! (Nasdaq: YHOO). The initial outrage, the olive branch to Yahoo!, and now the alleged recoil -- it's all a well-rehearsed act for Big G. I just don't know why the rest of the market can't see through this wafer-thin charade.
Google's latest turn came in a Wall Street Journal story yesterday, claiming that Google's enthusiasm for allowing Yahoo! to incorporate Google's massive ad network is waning. Enthusiasm waning? Losing interest? You can't be serious.
Yahoo! outsourcing its ad space -- at least its paid-search text-ad space, since Yahoo! is doing just fine in display advertising -- would benefit Google in a kazillion ways.
Even if Google paid Yahoo! 80% to 90% of the revenue generated through the partnership, the remainder would still be found money for Google.
It would silence Google's biggest competitor in paid search.
Microsoft would lose its obvious partner in taking on Google.
Google would only have to concentrate on fighting off Microsoft, instead of both Yahoo! and Microsoft.
I stopped at four, but there really are a kazillion reasons for Google to be chomping at the bit for a shot at landing Yahoo!'s Web-leading traffic. This is like a pie lover passing on dessert. It's Dale Earnhardt Jr. saying he would rather walk.
The popular argument is that regulators would nix the deal, but this isn't an acquisition. Google's been on top of the world, and there was no public outcry when AOL, MySpace, and CNN came running to Google's AdSense program to more effectively monetize their pages. Is Yahoo! now the only company that can't milk more out of its traffic, the way countless third-party publishers have by turning to Google?
With the latest rumors now claiming that News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) may be seeking to combine Yahoo! with MySpace, Google should be very interested. After all, Google is in the middle of a contract to serve its ads through MySpace. Even if Google pinned part of this past quarter's margin crunch on problems in monetizing social networking, the company would probably rather take the hit than let a rival's ad inventory gain wider distribution.
Of course Google wants to be the white knight here. It's just playing hard to get. If it acts too desperate, Microsoft may be pressured to make a higher bid, even as its own investors grumble about the altitude of the original offer.
Google has rehearsed its reactions. Now it's just waiting for the other players to fumble their lines.

Google Is Watching You

2008-02-26T07:25:00.000-08:00

It was just a matter of time.
In the latest evolutionary step in online-marketing domination, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) will now begin canvassing the Web with contextual ads on third-party videos.
Sure, Google was slow to monetize its YouTube monster. YouTube didn't start inserting overlay ads onto its clips until this past summer, and even then, it limited itself to revenue-sharing deals with its largest content creators.
Google never has to be the first mover to be the top dog. Sites such as Revver and Metacafe have been paying all of their original video makers -- not just the top draws -- for a couple of years now. Sites such as VideoEgg and Revver were popping ads into their videos long before YouTube dived in. Even this morning's move to insert ads into third-party videos isn't original. Video-search specialist Blinkx (OTC BB: BLNKF.PK) has been offering something similar since last year.
Initial partners in the Google AdSense for Video program include video content platforms such as Revver, YuMe, and Brightcove, as well as actual content producers such as BobVila.com. More are sure to come.
By allowing text-ad inserts -- not just the graphical video ads that are more common -- Google opens up the advertising platform to even the smallest of sponsors. Anyone can peck out a few words of promotional copy, and no one has a thicker list of advertisers than Google does.
Rivals don't shed tears when Google arrives late to the party. They just chew their fingernails down to the bone. Just ask Yahoo! (Nasdaq: YHOO). It had the inside track in paid search when it acquired Overture five years ago. Google subsequently launched its AdWords program and is now the undisputed champ of targeted text-based advertising.
Whether it's Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) with productivity software or Adobe (Nasdaq: ADBE) with presentation software, if there's a way to deliver apps through Web-stored solutions, Google is going to crash the party.
Competitors don't have to leave the party when Google arrives. They simply have to concede the baton that belongs to the life of the party.

Click fraud on the rise?

2008-02-26T07:04:00.000-08:00

It's the problem that Google insists isn't a problem and a topic that many online advertisers would prefer to ignore, but click fraud is potentially the biggest threat to the cost-per-click (CPC) advertising market.
And according to Click Forensics, "the leading provider of click fraud prevention solutions that help online advertisers and publishers stop click fraud before it happens," click fraud is on the rise.
On January 31, Click Forensics published its latest Click Fraud Index. It showed that:

In Q4 2007, the "overall industry average click fraud rate" increased to 16.6% from 14.2% in Q4 of 2006.

The average click fraud rate of CPC ads that are displayed on content networks such as Google AdSense was 28.3% in Q4 2007, up from 19.2% in the same quarter of 2006.

Botnet-originated click fraud rose 15% between Q3 2007 and Q4 2007.

Of course, these statistics are far-from-definitive in my opinion. That's not only because click fraud is often difficult to define and identify, but because Click Forensics sells solutions that are designed to fight click fraud, it obviously has an interest in playing up the problem. As such, the company's report should be taken with a grain of salt.
Nonetheless, click fraud has been the elephant in the room for the CPC advertising business for some time and based on my personal experiences and the anecdotes relayed to me from associates and friends, I personally believe that click fraud is a real problem.
While it's difficult to quantify accurately, the extent of the problem is probably closer in size to the picture painted by Click Forensics than that painted by companies like Google, which contend that they have effective measures in place to defend against it.Given that CPC advertising is now a multi-billion dollar business, has spurned an entire ecosystem of consultants and service providers and is considered by many to be the most accountable form of online advertising, it's clear that click fraud is a sensitive topic that has the potential to undermine the health of the online advertising business.
Even if you personally believe that the extent of click fraud has been overblown, perception is reality and reports like that issued by Click Forensics do have the potential to change perceptions.
At the end of the day, however, reports, personal experience and anecdotes shape my beliefs less than a logical evaluation of the situation.
I believe that click fraud is happening on a wide scale because it simply wouldn't make sense if it wasn't.
As Melissa Lafsky of the Freakonomics blog at New York Times asks:
"...if a criminal act is profitable, widely-practiced, seldom prosecuted and unusually easy to carry out, how many people will commit it?"

The answer, is logically, quite a few. And, like any other criminal enterprise, the extent to which the most sophisticated individuals will go to maximise the profits is significant. After all, click fraud is a perfect vehicle for fraud:
The barriers to entry are low.
Setting up websites and joining CPC content networks such as Google AdSense is a simple, low-effort process and there are a number of easy ways to engage in click fraud that don't require much skill.
The odds of being detected are fairly low.
Major CPC services see millions upon millions of clicks. This provides the perfect cover for nefarious activity. While I don't doubt that advanced fraud detection systems have been developed by major CPC networks, the volume of clicks certainly favors the fraudsters, especially those who are most sophisticated and use techniques such as botnets to mask their activities.
There are few consequences if caught.
Unlike criminal activities (i.e. identity theft) for which punishment can be severe, click fraud is low-risk. To my knowledge, nobody has ever been prosecuted criminally for click fraud, even though Google curiously had authorities drop a case against a man who tried to extort the company over a click fraud application he created. At worst, a criminal or opportunist will find his or her account terminated. For sophisticated criminals who are used to disappearing and reappearing, this is hardly a deterrent.
Beyond the fact that click fraud is a perfect vehicle for criminals and opportunists, however, I think that the biggest factor in making CPC fraud a serious problem is that the economics of the CPC business align the interests of the Googles of the world more with fraudsters than with advertisers.
While it's obvious that Google, for instance, would not be well-served by letting click fraud run rampant, it's also obvious that Google is a direct beneficiary of click fraud - Google makes money when AdSense fraudsters generate clicks.
Even if this benefit is not intentional, Google is faced with a difficult balancing act. It clearly cannot allow blatant fraud attempts to occur unchecked, but it has less incentive to try relentlessly to weed out smaller and more sophisticated attempts that are unlikely to be noticed by advertisers.
At the end of the day, I think the reason Google had authorities drop a case that prosecutors considered a "slam dunk" is that the case threatened to provide a detailed look inside the world of click fraud.
Maintaining an environment where the topic is relegated to speculation and debate was more important than seeing an individual extortionist prosecuted for his actions. After all, billions of dollars are at stake.
In my opinion, click fraud will eventually have to be dealt with more effectively. I no longer use CPC advertising because of it and I have associates who have either made the same decision or who have cut their CPC budgets significantly.
Like all forms of advertising, CPC has its strengths and weaknesses. It is not a panacea and never was, but it also doesn't have to be a perfect vehicle for fraud.
Pretending that it hasn't become one isn't doing CPC stakeholders any favours in the long run.

Google Launches AdSense for Video

2008-02-26T06:56:00.000-08:00

While AdSense for Video is the latest in a string of new advertising initiatives that Google has started over the past two years, few, if any, have created substantial revenue for Google. They include Google's programs to place ads in newspapers, on radio and on television stations and in a variety of new formats on the Web and on cell phones.
Hoping to earn more from its vast advertising network, Google has said it plans to begin selling ads to appear inside videos on sites across the Web.
While the money spent on Web video ads is a small fraction of the $20 billion spent on Internet ads in the United States, Google wants to capitalize on the explosion in online video and the scale of its advertising network, which analysts say includes a vast majority of Web advertisers and hundreds of thousands of Web sites.
The new program, AdSense for Video, could help Web publishers in that network make more money from their video clips.
While AdSense for Video is the latest in a string of new advertising initiatives that Google has started over the past two years, few, if any, of those initiatives have created substantial revenue for Google. They include Google's programs to place ads in newspapers, on radio and on television stations and in a variety of new formats on the Web and on cell phones.
Last year, an overwhelming majority of the company's $16.6 billion in revenue came from small text ads that appear alongside search results and on the Google advertising network. In its 2007 annual report, which it filed last week, Google noted: "Revenues realized through the Google Print Ads Program, Google Audio Ads, Google TV Ads, Google Checkout, YouTube, Postini and Search Appliance were not material in any of the periods presented."
AdSense for Video will offer advertisers a choice between video or text ads that will be overlaid on a small portion of the video viewer.
The text ads will rotate every 20 seconds and be tailored to match the content of the video and of the Web page where the video is played.
Overlay video advertising formats have been gaining favor with marketers as an alternative to the more common and intrusive "preroll" ads, in which viewers watch a television-style commercial before getting to the desired video. Google began using video overlays on YouTube in August, and a number of other sites use them as well.
"This allows us to become a one-stop shop for people interested in in-video advertising," said Christian Oestlien, a Google product manager. Advertisers will be able to place ads on YouTube and on Google's network of partners at the same time, he said.
AdSense for Video will start the program with about 20 partners' Web sites. They include video sites like Revver and Blip.tv and video technology companies like Brightcove and YuMe, which themselves deliver video content and ads to their own networks of Web publishers.
The program will initially be available only in the United States and to sites that stream at least one million videos a month.
AdSense for Video will put Google in competition with start-ups like VideoEgg and others, which run online video advertising networks.
Microsoft and Yahoo also sell and deliver video ads to partner sites.
Just last week, Yahoo paid $160 million to acquire Maven Networks, which is used by publishers like Fox News, CBS Sports and Gannett to show and distribute videos and ads on their Web sites.

Google knocks the BBC off top spot to take first place in Superbrands survey

2008-02-26T06:49:00.000-08:00

GOOGLE, the American internet search giant, has been voted the UK's number one brand in the latest annual Superbrands survey.
The company knocked the BBC off top position and into fourth slot, while Microsoft took second position and oil giant BP snatched third place in the annual snapshot.Stephen Cheliotis, chairman of the Superbrands council which oversees the survey, said the list was intended to reflect brands which have "established the finest reputations."

Google Scan Scans Vulnerabilities

2008-02-26T06:46:00.000-08:00

How safe is your private, or for that matter, your organization's critical information on the Web? Not very safe -- an American group of hackers which goes by the name "Cult of the Dead Cow" or "cDc" has released their latest Web tool named "Goolag Scan" that exposes how crippled online security actually is. According to its creators, "Goolag Scan" works as a Web auditing tool, and enables anyone and everyone to audit their own Web site through Google. The scanner technology is based on "Google hacking", a form of vulnerability research developed by a hacker named Johnny.
"Goolag Scan" is actually a small .NET program that can be used to search and list out vulnerabilities and private information from across the Web. It can discover Web applications, back doors, or documents that are involuntarily put on the Internet that contain sensitive information like tell-tale error messages, or Java applets for remote control of surveillance cameras. The tool provides pre-configured Google search queries in categories such as "vulnerable servers", "sensitive online shopping information", "files containing juicy information", "files containing passwords", and many more. Once you select such sets or even individual keywords, Google looks for them and lists matching results. Reportedly, excessive use of the tool will probably alert Google and make them block your IP address. According to the tool developers, it can help Web administrators of government, large corporations, and so on, to wake up to the discrepancies their Web base has and fix them immediately before a hacker takes over. And for those who don't know, "cDc" was formed in 1984. One of its famous accolades has been publishing the back-door program "Back Orifice", which threw light upon how easy it is to take complete remote control of a Windows PC.

Google joins consortium to build bandwidth

2008-02-26T06:39:00.000-08:00

Google is joining a consortium to build a trans-Pacific fiber-optic cable, yet another sign that Internet companies are becoming powerful communications entities in their own right as users increasingly turn to the Web to swap videos and talk across the globe.
The move, which was announced Monday afternoon, is the first time an Internet company has invested in a cable spanning an ocean, said Alan Mauldin, research director with Washington-based research firm TeleGeography.
"It shows that companies like Google are not just Web sites you go to," he said.
The 6,200-mile cable, which is estimated to cost about $300 million, is being funded by six companies that, in addition to Google, include telecommunications companies Bharti Airtel in India and SingTel of Singapore, and Pacnet, a Hong Kong-based deep-sea fiber-optic cable network operator.
The announcement comes amid a recent global boom in new cable construction and upgrades of existing lines, the largest expansion of fiber-optic systems since the dot-com bust, when too much cable capacity led to a market collapse and bankruptcy for fiber-optic network operators such as Global Crossing. Fiber-optic cable capacity across the Pacific is expected to increase 96 percent from 2007 through the end of this year, Mauldin said.
This time demand for capacity is driving the growth, said Bill Barney, chief executive of Pacnet, the largest investor in the consortium, dubbed Unity. In addition to the just-announced trans-Pacific cable, which is expected to be completed by early 2010, three others are being constructed or planned, including a line sponsored by Verizon, which should begin operating later this year, and another backed by a consortium that includes AT&T and telecommunications companies in Southeast Asia.
"Is there going to be a glut?" said Barney, whose company has numerous Silicon Valley corporate clients and is owned by an investment group led by three private equity firms. "A lot of the companies that are doing these things now are making money - Verizon, AT&T. We are making money. This isn't a business based on PowerPoint presentations and hype."
Between 2002 and 2007, trans-Pacific bandwidth demand soared an average of nearly 64 percent a year, according to TeleGeography research. The firm expects the demand for capacity in that part of the world to double roughly every two years through 2013.
A good part of the need for more trans-Pacific capacity is being driven by the dramatic increase of the technological interplay between the United States and Asia - everything from outsourcing work flowing between Silicon Valley and, say, India, and the desire of Asians to access online content from the United States.
"The key driver is, of course, Silicon Valley," Barney said. "Everyone is connecting back to the West Coast of the United States. The U.S. is the e-commerce hub."
An earthquake off the coast of Taiwan in late December 2006 also reminded telecommunications and Internet companies about the importance of using cables that take different routes across the globe. The quake snapped a half-dozen or more deep-sea fiber-optic cable systems in the Luzon Strait, representing some 90 percent of telecommunications capacity of the region. The costs of the ruptured cables were estimated in the billions of dollars in repairs and lost e-commerce.
The Unity cable will run along the ocean floor, dipping as deep as 2,000 feet below the surface, from Los Angeles to Chikura, Japan, where it will connect into other networks. Pacnet will control two of the five fiber pairs in the new cable. Each pair of fiber cables - a fiber cable is about the size of a single hair - are capable of carrying up to 960 gigabytes per second. That's about the equivalent of bandwidth needed for 15 million simultaneous voice calls. The line is expected to initially increase trans-Pacific "lit" cable capacity by about 20 percent, and could potentially add up to 7.68 terabytes per second of bandwidth across the Pacific. One terabyte is 1,000 gigabytes, or one trillion bytes.
For Google, joining a fiber-cable consortium enables it to lock in a low-cost price - and availability - of some of the bandwidth it needs, Mauldin said. As Internet companies play larger roles in how people communicate - through activities such as social networking and online gaming - finding bandwidth capacity at the right price will become more critical, he said.
"They are basically bandwidth hogs," Mauldin said. "The next time there is a cable built across the Atlantic, will it be built by Google, Limelight, Akamai - and none of the carriers?"

Google’s Cables Make Unnecessary Waves

2008-02-26T06:34:00.000-08:00

The multitude of blogs that follow Google’s every move were abuzz Friday with news that the Internet search giant was considering joining a consortium, called Unity, that would lay high capacity underwater cables across the Pacific Ocean. Some even speculated that it was yet another foray by Google into the telecommunications business. Google is already considering a bid for wireless spectrum in the United States and is building cell phone software.
Google declined to confirm or deny the news, which was first reported by Communications Day, an Australian publication. “Additional infrastructure for the Internet is good for users and there are a number of proposals to add a Pacific submarine cable,” the company said in a statement. “We’re not commenting on any of these plans.”
But my sources told me that Google has long considered becoming part owner of undersea cables, not as part of some new telecom venture, but rather because it needs the bandwidth to move massive amounts of digital information between its data centers around the world. The company already leases capacity in underwater cables, and owning some of the cables outright might prove cheaper than paying rents.
Google chief executive Eric Schmidt has long described the company’s collection of massive data centers around the world as the world’s largest supercomputer. If Google joins the Unity project, it will simply be adding a vital communications link to make sure that its supercomputer, and all the Web pages, videos and applications it delivers to millions of users around the world, is equally responsive in Asia as it is on this side of the Pacific

Google Shoots For The Moon

2008-02-25T02:49:00.000-08:00

MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIF. -
First it conquered cyberspace. Now, Google is setting its sights on outer space.
The company on Thursday announced the first 10 teams of competitors in its $30 million contest to send a spacecraft back to the moon to gain greater insights into the solar system and to find new sources of clean energy.
The Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) Lunar X Prize contest requires each team--largely composed of scientists and businesspeople--to build a robotic craft that can roam across the moon's surface, beam video, images and data back to Earth and even tap into natural resources.
One bold ambition of the project: using lunar materials to make solar power collectors that can generate carbon-free energy, which is then transmitted to the Earth. This, of course, would fit in nicely with the Mountain View, Calif., company's plan to develop alternative energy sources that are cheaper than coal and far less polluting. (See: " Google Goes Green") At least no one can accuse Google of thinking small.
Google isn't paying the costs for the teams to develop the rockets; it's simply holding out the carrot of a top prize of $20 million to the team that builds a vessel that can land on the moon and accomplish its mission. Each team has to raise the money to construct a spacecraft on its own.
The 10 teams vying to win Google's top prize come from diverse industries and parts of the world. The teams include Astrobotic, a collaboration between Carnegie Mellon University and Raytheon (nyse: RTN - news - people ); Chandah, spearheaded by an energy industry entrepreneur from Texas; Romania's Aeronautics and Cosmonautics Romanian Association; and Team Italia, a consortium of universities in Italy. Each team is using private funds to develop their robotic spacecrafts.
The contest, announced last fall, is being co-sponsored by the X Prize Foundation, a nonprofit organization that administers competitions to spur the development of technologies that aspire to solve dire problems around the world.
Google co-founder Sergey Brin came up with the idea for the contest after chatting with X Prize Foundation Chief Executive Peter Diamandis and PayPal founder Elon Musk. "It occurred to me that [Google] should be doing new kinds of things in ambitious and unexpected ways," Brin told a group of reporters at Google's headquarters Thursday.
He speculated that Google's contest might get a spacecraft on the moon before the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration does. The company said it will award a cash prize of $20 million by the end of 2012 to the contestant that lands a privately funded craft on the moon, roams the lunar surface for at least 50 meters (164 feet) and transmits a specified set of images and data back to Earth. By contrast, NASA has a deadline of 2020 to get another craft to the moon.
Although Google said the contest has received more than 567 "expressions of interest" from scientists and businesspeople around the world, 10 teams have thus far paid the $10,000 registration fee and have proved that their space vehicles could be functional. Diamandis expects another 10 to 20 teams to register.
In addition to the first-place prize, Google will award $5 million to a runner-up. The company also plans to dole out another $5 million in "bonus prizes," likely spread among several entrants.
The last spacecraft to land on the Moon was NASA's Apollo 12 mission, nearly 40 years ago. Nancy Conrad, the widow of Apollo 12 commander Charles "Pete" Conrad, attended the Google media briefing. "I'm stoked we're going back," she said.

Google Targets The Moon

2008-02-25T02:45:00.000-08:00

We all know Google as the conqueror of the cyberspace. While at this point of time, the Google Inc. leads the search engine segment, it has also become a necessity on other platforms like applications, online advertisements, social networking, open source apps, etc. Also, when it comes to technologies like satellite imaging Google has left all the companies behind. It is also known for its concerns for the society and has emerged as a socially responsible company. Their philanthropic endeavors include creating systems to help predict and prevent disease pandemics, empowering the poor with information about public services, creating jobs by investing in small- and mid-size businesses in the developing world, accelerating the commercialization of plug-in cars and making renewable energy cheaper than coal. Now Google has announced a $30 million contest, in association with X Prize Foundation - a nonprofit organization that administers competitions to spur the development of technologies that aspire to solve dire problems around the world, to send a space craft to Moon and gather images and data from the moon to get insights into the solar system and also to find natural resources on the surface of moon to find alternative clean sources of energy. It has recently announced the 10 teams which would be participating in the contest, out of the 567 applicants that 'expressed interest' to participate in the contest. However, only these 10 applicants, till now, have been able to deposit the participation fees of $10000 and have been able to display the capability of making their spacecrafts functional. Another 10 - 20 teams are expected to join the league.The important feature of this contest is that the spacecraft is not going to be funded by Google. The participants will have to themselves build a self financed spacecraft. Google would only give a prize of $30 million to the team winning team whose spacecraft is expected to roam the lunar surface for at least 50 meters (164 feet) and transmit a specified set of images and data back to Earth.It is speculated that Google's spacecraft would land on the Moon in 2012, which is far ahead of NASA's anticipated space mission in 2020.

Contrasts: Yahoo and Google

2008-02-25T02:44:00.000-08:00

The news in brief: Yahoo is still treading water as Google zooms further ahead.
There shouldn’t be too many surprises when Yahoo reports financial results for the second quarter tomorrow. After all, on June 18, just two weeks before the end of the quarter, Yahoo all but said how it expected the quarter to unfold. If you didn’t hear about it, it may be because the company packaged the announcement that results would be on the lower end of their previous expectations along with much bigger news: the replacement of chief executive Terry Semel with co-founder Jerry Yang.
For those who missed it, here’s roughly what Yahoo said. First, Project Panama, a years long effort to close the gap with Google in search advertising, will begin paying dividends in the second quarter, sooner than previously expected. Second, display advertising — the banners and other graphical ads that appear on Yahoo pages and elsewhere on the Web — would be weaker than expected, wiping out any expected gains from Panama.
In light of that, analysts will be looking closely at two things. How much better is Panama than the previous system? That’s one area were Yahoo could get some much-needed good news. The other is whether Yahoo narrows downward the range of expected results for the remainder of the year. Some analysts are already counting on that. “It would surprise me a bit if they didn’t guide to the lower end of the revenue range for the rest of the year,” said Derek Brown, of Cantor Fitzgerald.
And of course, since Yahoo is under new management, the earnings announcement may well be a platform for company executives to announce what else they plan to do to revive the company’s fortunes.
On average, Wall Street analysts expect Yahoo to report net revenue of $1.24 billion and profits of 11 cents a share, or roughly flat when compared with $1.12 billion and 11 cents in the same quarter last year. Results are due out on Tuesday after the close of markets.
But Yahoo’s biggest challenge may well be the comparison with rival Google, which reports results on Thursday after the close of markets. Since the company reported stellar first-quarter results on April 19, shares have risen from just over $470 to more than $550. Expectations are for another blockbuster quarter, largely on the strength of Google’s core business, search and contextual advertising.
Wall Street is expecting revenues of $2.68 billion and profits of $3.59 a share, sharply up from $1.67 billion and $2.33 a share in the same quarter in 2006.
Here are some points that Mr. Brown, of Cantor Fitzgerald, made following Google’s first-quarter results: Roughly one third of online advertising worldwide flows through Google’s platform; as of the first quarter, year over year net revenue has grown by 65 percent or more for 21 consecutive quarters; Google’s net revenue is larger than Yahoo’s and eBay’s and gross revenue is larger than Amazon’s; despite that, Google is growing seven times faster than Yahoo and more than twice as fast as eBay and Amazon; and Google’s profit margins are bigger than those of Yahoo, eBay and Amazon. “It is bigger, growing substantially faster, with higher margins,” Mr. Brown said. “That’s a pretty compelling set of attributes.”

Google Is Listening

2008-02-25T02:42:00.000-08:00

Mobile is one of Google’s top research priorities, according to Peter Norvig, Google’s director of research, in an interview in MIT’s Technology Review.
The first result of this effort is Google’s local business lookup service, 800-GOOG-411, a sort of voice-activated Yellow Pages. When you call this number, it will look up phone numbers and addresses for businesses in a certain town. Google isn’t the only company offering this sort of service. Microsoft recently bought Tellme, and there are others.)
Mr. Norvig said speech recognition may well be a key way that people conduct all sorts of searches from mobile phones.
It looks like things are moving more toward the mobile market, and we thought it was important to deal with the market where you might not have access to a keyboard or might not want to type in search queries.
Speech recognition, he added, will be an important way to search through videos as well. Blinkx and Everyzing are doing this now. Google isn’t, but Mr. Norvig says it will:
Right now, people aren’t searching for video much. If they are, they have a very specific thing in mind like “Coke” and “Mentos.” People don’t search for things like “Show me the speech where so-and-so talks about this aspect of Middle East history.” But all of that information is there, and with speech recognition, we can access it.
This is just a small data point, one that hints at a strain of product development from Google. Think about it however in the context of the strategic muddle at Yahoo. Google has a core theme to its business strategy: Building technologies that take advantage of its infrastructure of many processors storing vast amounts of data, mainly those that can be offered free and supported by advertising. That’s big and broad, and hardly a complete description of what Google is up to, but it focuses the mind in a way Yahoo still can’t.

Google v. Microsoft, In and Out of Court

2008-02-25T02:41:00.001-08:00

Google’s jabs at Microsoft came on multiple fronts this week.
In Washington, Google asked a federal judge on Monday for an extension of the government’s oversight of Microsoft’s business practices. It didn’t work. The judge told Google to let the Justice Department worry about Windows Vista.
But a less noticed attack on Microsoft may prove more fruitful for Google. Google has been offering free e-mail to businesses and organizations for some time. Now, the company is offering them a new service to easily move all the data from their existing e-mail servers to Gmail. The hope is that many more businesses will shift over to Gmail, and eventually to other Google applications that are integrated with it. Although Google says its free applications are not a replacement for Microsoft’s paid software programs, it’s hard not to see them as just that.

Google v. Microsoft: What’s the Better Workplace?

2008-02-25T02:40:00.000-08:00

The perks at Google have long been the talk of Silicon Valley and beyond. But when all is said and done, how do they stack up against the perks at Microsoft? And which is the better workplace?
That’s what a Microsoftie discussed in great detail in a post on a blog called “Just Say No to Google.” The unnamed Microsoftie had worked at Microsoft, then at Google and was back at Microsoft. He had shared those thoughts with a Microsoft recruiter, who had circulated them via e-mail inside Microsoft. No word as to who created the blog or posted the e-mail.
Some salient points: Google is a lot like Microsoft was “back when the company felt like most employees were in their mid 20s”; Microsoft has far better offices; Google pays less and its health insurance is not as good as Microsoft; but Google has free food, and that seems to trump all else. For the Google and Microsoft obsessed, there’s a lot more detail (including more than 300 comments, some from Google and Microsoft employees).
But then, there was the question of whether any of this was authentic. The All about Microsoft blog confirmed that the employee did exist and that those were his thoughts, but had no word yet on the recruiter. And no word on who had posted it to the Web.
The post is attracting so much attention, in part, because the war for talent between Google, Microsoft and others is hotter than ever. The companies are growing at phenomenal rates, and there are just not enough top recruits to go around. That’s especially true since Silicon Valley is packed with well-financed start-ups that are going after many of the same recruits. And they’ve got something that neither Google nor Microsoft can offer: the opportunity to strike it rich in a public offering.
The Wall Street Journal today writes about inroads that start-ups are making with Google’s workforce. The story points out that some veteran Googlers are leaving for startups, as the company has grown too big for some and as pre-I.P.O. stock options vest for others.
But in a story about talent wars in Silicon Valley last month, I also found that Google remains a powerful magnet. For the class of 2007, it was the most desired employer among both undergrads and M.B.A.s, according to surveys.

Yahoo Good, Google Better (a Lot Better)

2008-02-25T02:39:00.001-08:00

It’s become a monthly ritual with few surprises. Web audience measuring firms report numbers for Web search traffic in the United States. Yahoo does well. Google does a lot better. Microsoft and others barely hold on, or worse.
It’s no different this month. Nielsen/NetRatings said that the number of searches conducted on Yahoo grew by 18.6 percent in May, compared with the same month last year. Pretty good stuff, until you consider that the number of searches conducted on Google grew by 44 percent, topping 4 billion in a single month for the first time. That leaves Google with 56.3 percent of all searches, a nearly 3-1 advantage over Yahoo, and a 7-1 advantage over Microsoft, the No. 3 in search.
Hitwise, another measuring firm, says Google’s lead is even greater: 65.1 percent, to Yahoo’s 20.9 percent and Microsoft’s 8.4 percent.
The numbers go some way toward explaining why some people suggest that Yahoo should simply outsource its search business to Google.

As Ask Erases Little, Google and Others Keep Writing About You

2008-02-25T02:37:00.000-08:00

With Ask.com introducing the AskEraser — a switch that will stop the site from collecting information about a user — it’s worth checking in on the real state of play with the accumulation of data online.
As usual, the reality is very far from the public perception. Ask is far down on the list of sites that anyone who cares about privacy would be concerned about. It is hardly pervasive, so it doesn’t collect much data at all. And Ask doesn’t even run its own advertising system (it uses Google) so it doesn’t have much reason to collect data.
Of course, Ask is simply trying to gain marketing points by differentiating itself from Google, which to some embodies the erosion of privacy in the Internet world.
Google indeed collects a lot of data. It sees the bulk of the searches on the Internet and an increasing amount of other activity. And it obsessively files away most every scrap of data it receives. (Google will say that much of this data doesn’t include the personal identity of the user it is tracking. In fact, it actually has enough pieces of information to identify a lot of users if it really wanted to.)
Google, however, has been very reluctant to use all this data in its advertising business. One reason is that it has other information that solves its main problem: picking the right ads to show on each page. It uses what people are searching for on its search site and the content of other pages on which ads appear (including, of course, the content of messages displayed in Gmail).
But as Google gets bigger it is tiptoeing into using more data for targeting. It tries to determine the location of users in order to show ads of local businesses. It also gets some personal information about users from partner sites on which it displays ads — like MySpace — to help it choose ads.
And Google has now started dipping its little toe into the pool that Madison Avenue calls behavioral targeting. That approach is based on the idea that the best way to pick an ad to show you now is to look at your online activity from a few hours or days ago. The classic example is showing car dealer ads to someone who searched for minivans yesterday.
Google is testing this concept by exploiting a feature of the way Internet browsers work, according to a Google spokesman. When a browser asks a site for a given page (such as the search results for a specific term) it sends it the address of the last page the user saw.
Google is using this information to take into account what you just searched for and your previous search when it displays ads. The Google spokesman said the cookies that Google places on users’ hard drives to identify repeat visitors do not come into play here.
Here’s how you can see this in action. Search for “lawyers” on Google. You will see law firm ads, some perhaps near where you are. Then search for “malpractice.” Now search for “lawyers” again. This time the ads will be for lawyers who specialize in malpractice.
So far this is largely harmless. It’s hard to imagine any violation that comes from Google having access to what you did 30 seconds before. What’s interesting is what comes next. As Google moves to place advertising on sites like MySpace, which have no natural advertisers, there is ever more pressure for it to use other sources of information to raise the prices at which it can sell those ads. Google is too quantitative — and it has too many engineers hanging around — not to be trying to calculate the extra money it would earn by using behavioral data for ad targeting. It also knows that it is a company in a fishbowl and anything it does that smacks of privacy invasion will cause a storm of comment and likely protest.
Most significantly, Google would be foolish to do anything that highlighted the way it could use its data until it receives final approval to buy DoubleClick.
One other thought here: Google is a lightning rod for debate about privacy because it is extending so quickly into so many areas. But there are so many other companies that are far nosier about what you do online and are unafraid to exploit that information. (I wrote about this last year, and activity in targeting has gotten more intense since then.)
From the start, Yahoo has seen itself as a company that uses data about users for the benefit of advertisers. And Yahoo already uses what you search for to pick which ads to show you on other parts of its site.
What’s more, there are advertising networks most people have never heard of (including Tacoda and Advertising.com, both owned by AOL, and BlueLithium, recently bought by Yahoo) that are in the business of collecting data about Internet users for advertising. Even creepier, Internet service providers are starting to monitor everything their users do to funnel ads to them.
All this is not to say that there is anything wrong with what Ask is doing. Some people may well want to search on a site that says it won’t remember anything about what they do. But the issues of what data is collected and how it is used is are far more relevant for Google, Yahoo, and a bunch of firms that are hidden from view.

Google Doesn’t Know Where You Are (But It Has a Good Guess)

2008-02-25T02:36:00.000-08:00

Users of Blackberries and many other smartphones can now push a button and the Google mapping service will figure out more or less sort of where they are.
Last month, I wrote a post called “One Reason We Need a Google Phone: Free GPS.” I was complaining that cellphone carriers, mainly Verizon, are disabling the GPS navigation systems built into phones so they can charge $10 a month for the service. I posited that a Google phone wouldn’t have such a nasty gotcha. (Actually, in Google’s very open model for its Android operating system, carriers and phone makers are free to put as many gotchas as they want into phones.)
Google today is adding a feature for some smartphones that don’t have built in GPS but can read the unique identifying number of the cell tower they are connected to. By using this information, Google can display a map of the general area they are in. (Google isn’t the first to try this sort of thing.)
Google nicely tried to design the service to take into account its limitations. When you push the button, it draws a dot at the nearest cell tower and draws a circle around it to identify the area in which it thinks you are. The screen will tell you the margin of error, typically between 500 and 2000 feet.

Google sent me a Blackberry to try this out. (My cheap Times-provided Samsung isn’t nearly smart enough to perform this trick.) A test on a bus trip from suburban New Jersey to midtown Manhattan shows that Google’s system can generally figure out what neighborhood you are in, but it overestimated its own accuracy. I was often just outside its margin of error circle. Most comically, it insisted I had arrived in New York for the 20 minutes I was stuck in the Lincoln Tunnel. Anyway, this is a nice modest tweak to the service that will help people who are totally lost, but it’s not going to provide real-time driving directions.
I spoke yesterday to Steve Lee, the product manager for Google Maps for Mobile, and I did learn a few interesting tidbits about the service.
First, Google figures out which cell towers are where by secretly enlisting the help of a million of its mobile maps users who happen to have phones with built-in GPS devices that are not locked by the carriers (that means no one who uses Verizon). These phones have been reporting to Google where they are, based on the GPS data and what cell tower they are connected to.
Before I even asked, Mr. Lee told me that Google had thought through the rather creepy privacy implications of all this. Google’s standard approach is that it logs everything it does by the unique cookie of an Internet browser (or the equivalent unique ID of a mobile phone). For the location information from GPS and cell towers, Mr. Lee said, Google has built a database with not a bit of personal user information.
When pressed, however, he also admitted there is a loophole to this. The payoff for Google from building out its mapping service is to get people to conduct searches from their cellphones. This is a nice feature. Push a button on the map software, type “Starbucks” and it will display a map of the closest source of a latte fix, based on the cell tower or GPS data. The catch, is that this query, with your location, is entered in Google’s log files along with your phone’s unique ID.
For almost everyone, this won’t matter. But if your location is really a secret, don’t ask Google to help you find coffee.
UPDATE: Barry Schnitt, of Google’s PR department, wrote with some clarifications. The service, he said, is in beta and the accuracy will improve as it is used. He took issue with the word “secretly” about how Google gathers the GPS data because such use is disclosed in the privacy policy of the service. And he also doesn’t like the headline that implies that Google has a good guess where you are. Google, as the item says, knows your cellphone’s ID number but not your name. (That is unless you use a service that requires you to log in, say Gmail for cellphones.) Mr. Schnitt’s entire note is in the comments below.
UPDATE 2: Mr. Schnitt wrote back to say I was wrong and that the unique ID used by the Google Maps system can’t be connected to any ID for GMail, which uses a separate application. So unless the map application starts to ask you to identify yourself, Google doesn’t know where you are

I.P. Address: Partially Personal Information

2008-02-25T02:35:00.000-08:00

My post about whether Google’s records of the Internet Protocol address should be considered personal information under privacy law, brought two comments from Googlers: Matt Cutts, an engineer, and from Peter Fleischer, Google’s global privacy counsel.
Both go over the many technical and legal reasons that the I.P. addresses in Google’s records can’t, in isolation, be tracked back to an individual. Very true.
But the converse is also true: The I.P. addresses Google collects, when combined with other information, can sometimes identify an individual, or a household.
This raises all sorts of implications that need to be considered as we move into a world where so many more actions we take will be logged digitally in some way.
The opposite of identification is anonymity. When I.P. addresses of Internet actions are all recorded, anonymity is harder to preserve.
Logging I.P. addresses is similar to a security camera recording everyone entering your store. Without any more information, you don’t know the names or identities of any of the people on the recording. But that recording makes it much easier to gather that information and find out who is shopping. Some people you can identify because they go on to buy something providing their names. Other people you can’t identify, but the government with its database of drivers licenses photographs or other investigative techniques can.
Mr. Fleischer acknowledges that Google’s records, combined with those from an Internet service provider, can indeed link a particular computer to a particular pattern of searches. He says I.S.P.’s, by law, can’t give that information to Google. But he admits that government investigators or even private litigators can:
In order for someone to tie the IP to an account holder, there have to be at least two subpoenas issued: one to Google and a separate one to the ISP.
This is important because people have lots of reasons to keep information private. They may not want Google to use for advertising. But they may also want to keep secrets from people who may have the right to sue them.
Mr. Fleischer discusses at some length the technicalities of European law over what defines personal information. I.P. addresses, he argues don’t qualify. And more broadly, he suggests that some of the general principles that apply to personal information—standards of notice and choice, for example– aren’t always appropriate for I.P. addresses.
Perhaps we should start considering another category: partially personal information—bits of data that can be personal under certain circumstances. There are real questions about who should collect this information, under what circumstances, and what they should do with it.
The statements by Google and others that simply argue that I.P. addresses aren’t personal distract people from the thoughtful understanding of what they are and how they can be used.

Goolag Tool Lets Google Aid Hackers

2008-02-25T02:30:00.000-08:00

The hacking group Cult of the Dead Cow has released a tool that should make Google hacking a little easier for novices.
CalledGoolag, the open-source software lets hackers use the Google search engine to scan Web sites for vulnerabilities.
This is something that hackers have been doing for years, but it can be tricky work -- involving custom scripts and tools that sift through the mountain of data available via Google.
The Cult of the Dead Cow is best known forcreating the Back Orifice software10 years ago, which could be used to remotely control a Windows machine.
Like Back Orifice, the software could be used by both legitimate security professionals and criminals. Goolag comes with an easy-to-use graphical interface. It is based on techniques developed by Computer Sciences Corp. researcher Johnny Long, a well-known computer hacker who has spent years documenting the way that Google's search engine can be used to uncover security vulnerabilities in the Web sites it indexes.
In a statement, The Cult of the Dead Cow said that the software is "one more tool for Web site owners to patch up their online properties."
"It's no big secret that the Web is the platform," the statement said. "And this platform pretty much sucks from a security perspective."
There are already free Web vulnerability search tools available -- such as theWiktoscanning software -- but the Cult of the Dead Cow's notoriety will probably help make Goolag popular, security experts said Friday.
"I don't think it's particularly new, but maybe it makes [Google hacking] more accessible," said Robert Hansen, CEO of Sectheory.com and author of theHa.ckers.orgWeb security blog.
"It is interesting because it could theoretically represent a lower burden of entry for the novice Google hacker," he added.
Amichai Shulman, chief technology officer with security vendor Imperva, agreed that there are still far too many security vulnerabilities on Web sites. "Maybe the headlines that this release is getting will serve as a wake-up call for application owners," he said.

Google unleashes more ads in videos

2008-02-21T23:10:00.000-08:00

Google has launched AdSense for Video, enabling Web sites another way to push ads in our faces.
I'm not complaining...well, actually I am. The ads don't offer much, except more distraction to already ad-filled Web sites.
Viewing the ads on My Damn Channel, for instance, you can't always tell an ad from actual entertainment content. I know the lines between advertising and entertainment are blurring. But this seems like overkill. There are banner ads on the sides, top, and bottom of the page. There are text ads on the sides and the same text ads are now rotating as overlays on top of the video I'm watching, covering up a swath at the bottom of the screen and interfering with the action.
The ads are a distraction, not an enhancement, to an otherwise great program. My Damn Channel's "Horrible People" is a funny online sitcom and well worth checking out. But this can't be the best way to monetize it--with ads I can already see elsewhere on the page.
And where's the context? The ads are for film producers, a commercial director, Burbank sound stages, and women's shoes. Nothing there that would appeal to a general comedy-watching Internet user like myself.
The best thing about the ads are the little "X" in the corner that you can click to make them go away.

Google Storing Patients' Health Records

2008-02-21T23:04:00.000-08:00

mytrip writes with news that Google's health record archive is about to be tested with the assistance of the Cleveland Clinic. Thousands of patients (who must approve the transfer of information) will have access to everything from their medical histories to lab results through what Google considers a "logical extension" of their search engine. We discussed the planning of this system last year. "Each health profile, including information about prescriptions, allergies and medical histories, will be protected by a password that's also required to use other Google services such as e-mail and personalized search tools. The health venture also will provide more fodder for privacy watchdogs who believe Google already knows too much about the interests and habits of its users as its computers log their search requests and store their e-mail discussions. Prodded by the criticism, Google last year introduced a new system that purges people's search records after 18 months. In a show of its privacy commitment, Google also successfully rebuffed the U.S. Justice Department's demand to examine millions of its users' search requests in a court battle two years ago."

Google plan $17 million fund to finance SMEs

2008-02-20T21:10:00.000-08:00

George Soros’, Soros Economic Development Fund (SEDF), Omidyar Network, and Google.org today announced that they were working together to create a $17 million (around Rs 68 crore) Small to Medium Enterprise (SME) investment company for India to create job opportunities and spur greater economic participation for a larger segment of the population.

This joint investment company is expected to provide capital to small and medium businesses in underserved markets. Most of the existing SME funds make investments in the $3-$5 million range, leaving out a significant portion of this market.

The investment company will target this “missing middle” with equity investments between $500,000 and $3.5 million. Many small to medium businesses lack formal funding options because of a market gap between the microloans offered by microfinance institutions and the larger investments of commercial banks and PE funders, said the press release from Google India.

“With this investment, we will meet the huge demand to serve smaller businesses in India that have little access to finance. Long ignored by commercial capital markets, small and medium businesses are an attractive investment opportunity as well as an engine for economic growth for India,” said Neal DeLaurentis, vice-president of Soros Economic Development Fund.”

The three companies plan to locate the investment advisor at the Indian School of Business (ISB) in Hyderabad to leverage the school’s SME expertise. Dr Reuben Abraham, currently the ISB’s Director of the Base of Pyramid Lab and a board member of SEDF, is expected to be the senior advisor.

“We have seen what microloans can do at the individual level and are excited about bringing that same opportunity to small and medium businesses,” said Jim Bunch, Director of Investments at Omidyar Network.

“While SMEs in rich countries represent half of the GDP, they account for a much lower portion in developing economies such as India, partly because SMEs don’t have access to the same type of financing. Our goal is to increase the flow of capital to SMEs in India,” said Sonal Shah of Google.org.

The investment company will hire an experienced investment advisor and two experienced senior investment analysts based in India to recommend and build the pipeline of portfolio investments

Google: Reducing “Accidental Clicks” Could Hurt Revenue

2008-02-20T06:32:00.001-08:00

Google (GOOG) warned in its latest 10-K filing that its future revenues could be hurt by its efforts to reduce “accidental clicks” on Web advertising. An excerpt:

…we may continue to take steps to improve the relevance of the ads displayed on our web sites and our Google Network members’ web sites. These steps include removing ads that generate low click-through rates or that send users to irrelevant or otherwise low quality sites and terminating Google Network members whose web sites do not meet our quality requirements. In addition, we may continue to take steps to reduce the number of accidental clicks. These steps could negatively affect our near-term advertising revenues. Both seasonal fluctuations in internet usage and traditional retail seasonality have affected, and are likely to continue to affect, our business.

Silicon Alley Insider asserts that the language about accidental clicks is new to Google’s filings.

In the 10-K, Google says it has made “a change to the clickable area around our AdSense for content text-based ads to only the title and URL to reduce the number of accidental clicks.”

Soros, Google venture to target Indian firms

2008-02-20T06:05:00.000-08:00

Billionaire philanthropist George Soros has teamed up with the charitable arm of Google Inc. and the founder of eBay Inc. to start a $17 million (U.S.) investment company targeting small and midsize Indian companies.

The Small to Medium Enterprise Investment Company for India will seek to create jobs by helping finance companies too big to receive micro-loans and too small to be funded by banks or private-equity firms, the backers said yesterday. The venture will be funded by the Soros Economic Development Fund, the Omidyar Network, started by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and his wife Pamela, and Google.org.

Micro-credits, pioneered by Bangladesh-based Grameen Bank, have grown in popularity in recent years in developing countries.

The new venture will make equity investments of $500,000 to $3.5 million.

Google generated $2.53 billion in advertising sales from U.K. in 2007

2008-02-20T05:58:00.000-08:00

LONDON (Dow Jones)--Internet search giant Google Inc.(GOOG 508.95, -20.69, -3.9%) generated sales of $2.53 billion, or GBP1.30 billion, in the U.K. in 2007, according to a regulatory filing.

The figures underline the extent to which Google is closing the gap, in sales terms, with the U.K.'s largest advertiser-funded broadcaster, ITV PLC (ITV.LN), and its increasing market share in the U.K. advertising marketplace.

Google's U.K. sales grew 45% in 2007, according to the filing. This represents a significant slowdown in the sales growth rate from 80% sales growth in 2006. Google generated roughly 15% of total sales in the U.K. in 2007, down slightly from 16% in 2006.

In the filing, Google blamed weakness in key market sectors such as finance and travel for the slower U.K. growth.

ITV generated sales of GBP1 billion in the first half of 2007. More than half of ITV's advertising revenue comes from its flagship ITV1 channel, which saw revenue contract 9% in the first half of 2007, compared with the year-earlier period.

UBS, commenting on the filing, forecast that internet advertising would account for around 20% of total U.K. advertising expenditure by the end of 2008.