Comment by kuratkull
4 years ago
It's pretty easy to understand what information is technically static and could be used to track you. Number of tabs: low possible range and pretty variable, even for tab hoarders, so it's low entropy information. Amount of RAM used in each open tab: that should be statistically significant and I'm pretty sure could be used to identify people if there are enough tabs open for a long enough period. When each tab was viewed: every (not-)clicked tab is a bit of information, you don't need much to narrow down a person. Interesting reading on de-anonymizing people on seemingly anonymized data: https://www.wired.com/2007/12/why-anonymous-data-sometimes-i...
Telemetry isn't okay simply because it can't be used to track someone. The number of tabs I have open isn't identifiable information, but it's still my private information, and should not leave my computer without my advance consent. Using my computer hardware to transmit my usage activity (even my unidentifiable usage activity) without my consent is a dick move.
My usage data is mine, as is my hardware and network connection.
You are going beyond my example by saying this information can be used to track you. This is the only information collected in my example. It is not associate with any other information so there is no value in trying to deanonymize it.
Perhaps it is better if I approach the question from a different angle. What is the downside of someone having this specific information about you? Can you think of a single negative repercussion from someone knowing how many tabs you have open? That is the fundamental point here.
The idea that all information related to a user should inherently be private just seems like a needless draconian standard and one that didn't exist in the pre-digital age. The privacy value of each piece of information can vary wildly. Some of it deserves protecting. Some of it doesn't.