With Google’s latest tracking turnaround fresh in mind, here’s another one. Not only did cookies get a stay of executionit now appears that fingerprints are also making a comeback. But as one regulator pointed out, Google itself has said this type of tracking “distorts user choice and is wrong.” And yet here we are: wrong or not. “We believe this change is irresponsible,” warns the regulator.

For his part, Google cites advances in so-called privacy-enhancing technologies (PET) as having raised the bar for user privacy, allowing it to loosen the chains on advertisers and hidden trackers that underpin the Internet and make the entire ecosystem work. This, he says, will unlock “new ways for brands to securely manage and activate their data”, while also “giving give people the privacy protections they expect. The risk is that this simply pushes the dark side of tracking cookies into a new era, and in a way that makes it impossible for users to understand their risks.

ForbesFBI Warns Gmail, Outlook, and Apple Mail Users: Check 3 Things to Stop AttacksBy Zak Doffman

The specifics are complex: These are the algorithms that ingest all the data signals you emit when you browse the Internet on any device, some based on who you are: device identifiers, IP address and credentials, but also the sites you visit and the apps you use. like a map to follow and analyze. The change has been brought about, Google explainsin part due to “the wider range of surfaces on which advertisements are displayed”. This includes smart TVs and gaming consoles, as well as all your usual browser and app activities.

Although Chrome has taken a lot of criticism when it comes to tracking, this takes it to a very different new level. “Over the past decade,” Google explains, “the way people interact with the Internet has changed dramatically. We therefore constantly evaluate our policies to ensure that they reflect the latest technological developments and meet the needs of our partners and the expectations of users. And so from February 16Google will be “less prescriptive with its partners in how they target and measure ads” across “the broader range of surfaces on which ads are served (such as connected TVs and gaming consoles).”

“Fingerprinting involves collecting information about a device’s software or hardware that, when combined, can uniquely identify a particular device and user” explains Stephen Almond, representing the UK Information Commissioner’s Office. “The ICO’s view is that fingerprinting is not a fair way of tracking users online, as it is likely to reduce people’s choice and control over how their information is collected. Google’s policy change means that fingerprinting could now replace the functions of third-party cookies.

The ICO states that “when you choose an option on a consent banner or ‘clear all site data’ in your browser, you generally control the use of cookies and other traditional forms of local storage. However, fingerprinting relies on signals that you cannot easily erase. So even if you “clear all data from the site,” the organization using fingerprinting techniques could immediately identify you again. This is not transparent and cannot be easily controlled. Fingerprinting is harder for browsers to block, and therefore even privacy-conscious users will have a hard time stopping it.

The regulator and Google have confirmed they will continue to engage on the change, which the ICO says is a “reversal in its position and a departure from our expectations of a privacy-respecting internet.” . The regulator also issued a stark warning to businesses who may be preparing for the gloves to come off in February when the changes come into force. “Companies do not have carte blanche to use fingerprints as they wish. Like all advertising technology, it must be deployed legally and transparently – and if it isn’t, the ICO will take action.

Google gives an example of the need for such fingerprinting in its announcement: smart TVs and streaming services. “People are increasingly adopting connected television (CTV) experiences, making it one of the fastest growing advertising channels. Businesses advertising on CTV need to be able to connect with relevant audiences and understand the effectiveness of their campaigns. As people and households increasingly turn to streaming platforms, the ecosystem should invest and develop effective and measurable solutions in an incredibly fragmented environment.

Simply put: cross-platform, cross-device ad tracking. A move that shifts focus away from Chrome as the epicenter of Google’s tracking empire, the timing of which is interesting.

It is difficult to imagine a more complex context, with ongoing DOJ action expected to see changes imposed, including the possibility of divesting Chrome. Then there remains the uncertainty as to what will replace tracking cookies. “Businesses should not view fingerprinting as a simple solution to losing third-party cookies and other cross-site tracking signals,” the ICO says, insisting that users have “significant control over how whose information is used to show them personalized advertisements.

ForbesMicrosoft Stops Updates for Millions of Windows Users: Here’s What You Do NowBy Zak Doffman

In their simplest form, although tracking cookies are a malicious part of the Internet, they can be seen and controlled, whether through pop-ups on these websites or by choosing to use a form of private browsing. which completely blocks these cookies. Digital fingerprints are not as obvious and therefore harder to spot and block. They are also more open to clever manipulation as the tracking industry tests the limits.

Google says it can “apply privacy-preserving protections that help businesses reach their customers on these new platforms without the need to re-identify them.” And because we seek to encourage responsible use of data as the new normal on the web, we will also collaborate with the wider advertising industry and help make PETs more accessible.

Coming just months after the reversal of tracking cookies and without a firm plan B on the site, this is already being met with significant regulatory skepticism. For users, this is yet another reason to think carefully about the browser they use and the settings they apply across all their smart devices.

I have contacted Google for comment on these regulatory warnings.