The current default home page of firefox violates user trust

I have a few suggestions for questions that should be answered in the "further information" link:

* Is there a deal with Google that funds Ubuntu?
* Are the search results any different from plain Google (apparently they are), and why?
* Are the searches tracked?

Any reason that this bug isn't a duplicate of bug 305905? Vincenzo - I see that you've recently commented on bug 305905, what is the reason that you see this as a separate issue?

As to the question about why the page is not local - there is no compelling reason I can think of for the page to be local. It's opened in a web browser, is only useful if the user is connected to the internet (because it triggers a google search or other links) and is cached after first viewing.

Mattew: bug #305905 is about the different results, so if the results could be made identical to the standard google ones, that bug would be solved.

This one is about the users not being informed on what search are they making and who is their data sent to, and who is making money out of that.

In particular, making money is a debatable subject: this can not happen without showing advertising. Noticing more prominent and frequent ads is actually what led me to discover the fact that the search is not the standard one. On the other hand, if it is by making an informed choice, I don't have problems in making ubuntu earn cash when I search the web.

But I want to be sure about what data is tracked (e.g. could you make that public?), if I am anonymous, if my launchpad cookie can be associated to queries,if my search results are altered, and if users I advice ubuntu to, are informed and not tricked into the system.

I don't know the answers to these questions, but they seem more like questions than a bug report to me. I'd suggest you get in touch with Matthew Nuzum, the Ubuntu webmaster, who takes care of this page.

Il 28/07/2009 13:09, Matthew East ha scritto:
> I don't know the answers to these questions, but they seem more like
> questions than a bug report to me. I'd suggest you get in touch with
> Matthew Nuzum, the Ubuntu webmaster, who takes care of this page.
>
> ** Project changed: ubuntu-website => ubuntu-start-page
>

Matthew, I raised these as questions, and I was instructed to report a
bug. I will stop ping-ponging now, please signal this message yourself
to whoever you think may be interested, it will be a big favour to me,
since I can't keep with this treasure hunt, I am about to fly for yet
another international working trip. I will do one last attempt, CC
mattew nuzum right now.

Mattew, please read the bug report, and eventually take a look to the
links I post. I am tired of repeating the same thing again and again, I
hope you'll understand.

I asked the questions one year ago and five days ago on the
ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list, but I never got any constructive
reply. You can see for yourself.

I was directed to the ubuntu-mozilla-team and got no reply. If this is
really the result of a single-man effort, and there is nobody else that
knows about it, then all my concerns are wrong, just let us fix the bug.

The first part of this is in fact a bug and should be fixed: the default
page should include a short explanation and a link for what the user is
doing. Being sure that the user understands the process is better than
risking to trick unaware users into doing something they may not like.
Hopefully, the link should point to a place where ALL the concerns
expressed here are answered, because this is free software and this is
the mood of some of your users. The other option is to just wait and let
us go away, but that will confirm our concerns.

Here are the links to where I asked this as a question. Before changing
your mood, keep in mind that I have been waiting for one year, and that
I commented on the other bug you mentioned, one month ago, without
getting a reply. I really want to be collaborative but this needs to be
addressed. I have met other people who thinks the same.

http://<email address hidden>/msg04111.html

http://<email address hidden>/msg08993.html

Vincenzo

Dear all, I finally decided. I though about this for several months. In this case, a "strike" may be justified. Please (especially developers) don't become polemic with that. I cooperated with you for a very long time, you can see that in my launchpad home page. However, I feel like the trust break is grave. I hereby start my own personal strike. If other people feels the same, we shall see if you need this vocal minority to be on your side or not. That's up to you.

Here is how the strike is going to work.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugReportersStrike

Please understand that it's not because I am your enemy that I waste my time doing that. I could just go away instead. Also notice that I am actually using your resources to do this (the wiki page). If this is against your terms and conditions ask me and I'll move that page somewhere else.

Please all, read the page and fix it. I just drafted it very quickly. It's a wiki, it can be improved. Vandalism will result in countermeasures of course.

> the search is not the standard google search.

This appears to be a dup of bug #305905 ("start.ubuntu Google CSE has fewer features").

> the default home page is not local

Probably to allow statistics gathering of how many users are using Firefox on Ubuntu in the default configuration, and to allow for live updating (for example important information or new translations).

> if the launchpad cookie can be associated to the queries that users submit.

Cookies are sent (returned) only to the domain that submitted them. It is possible to view the cookies on your system at Edit->Preferences->Privacy->Show cookies->Search=launchpad.net. The cookies are set to last for a period of 5-12 months, and the host(s) that will receive the cookie are displayed in the "Host:" line. A ".launchpad.net" line will be sent along with any visited *.launchpad.net web page request, whereas eg. "blog.launchpad.net" would only be sent back to "blog.launchpad.net".

If the first issue (lack of functionality whilst still _claiming_ to be Google Search) is the primary purpose of this bug report, do you have additional objections to this be marked a duplicate of bug #305905 ?

The primary purpose of this bug report is the violation of user trust. I opened a separate bug for that reason.

So is it the setting of 'start.ubuntu.com' as the default page, or the use of Google CSE that is the issue?

Il 11/08/2009 18:21, Paul Sladen ha scritto:
> So is it the setting of 'start.ubuntu.com' as the default page, or the
> use of Google CSE that is the issue?
>

I don't know, that's up to you.

The bug is that users see by default a page that looks like google and
is not google, and users should ALWAYS be able to tell when they're
sending their data to somebody, and when they are receiving more banners
because somebody else earns cash.

The possible solutions are many.

1) do not use the CSE at all in the start page, because it's "evil" in
the sense that users can not tell if some sites have been excluded from
the search (unless doing an infinite number of tests).

2) edit start.ubuntu.com so that it contains a brief explanation of
what's going on, and users can easily tell that they are not going to
search on google

3) do not use start.ubuntu.com/distribution as a default home page (then
what to do with that page I don't know). If start.ubuntu.com is still
linked by the distribution packages, it should still be edited as in 2)
above

4) provide a default home page that lets users opt-in in your data
collection things. That would be the saner way.

5) whatever you can come up with, it's your software, not mine. I'd go
for 4 if it was mine.

Vincenzo

Is this bug being taken care of? For me it looks and sounds very confusing to have a search bar with the google logo above it and my search-item is not only forwarded to google but others log it as well. That to me sounds rather deceptive since there is no obvious indication that canonical or someone at ubuntu is logging it.

I mean, someone who knows about pages and stuff can probably look at the sourcecode of the page and see that this is not just a normal google search bar but links to
http://www.google.com/cse
but the most people I encounter will not have a clue about that [I had never heard of google-cse before].

So to me this sounds like data-farming with unsuspecting users and that I find shadowing this otherwise wonderful example especially when it comes to user-experience named Ubuntu.

I see that the page for karmic koala
http://start.ubuntu.com/9.10/index.html
is already prepared and does not seem different from the older versions, so I take it that there is no change planned?

When it comes to solutions I do agree with Vincenzo Ciancia (though I could live with the second proposes solution as well).

Best of luck and in any case thank you all for your dedication by a small pebble in the stream :-)

Il 18/09/2009 16:37, Prunus dulcis ha scritto:
> Is this bug being taken care of?

It does not look like. The fact that nobody actually *wants* to care of
this bug, and the unbelievable corporate spirit of *all* developers
(none of them ever wanted to recognise the problem reported here) led me
to leave ubuntu and in particular its development process. This was good
for me, since I learned that trying to have a single linux distribution
for all persons is bad, since it concentrates an enormous power in the
hand of few people. Now I discovered that the world out there is big,
and there are antagonists of ubuntu. While on the marketing side it's
already late (most people I know equate GNU/linux with ubuntu) perhaps
we are still in time to remedy our big mistake (I personally pushed
*that* view of GNU/linux=ubuntu for years, so I am responsible for the
current situation).

Vincenzo

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this is a trust-breach.
The results are provided by Google, and there is Ubuntu branding around the search to make it clear that Ubuntu is somehow involved in the search.
There are many reasons for us to host this page, and none of them violate any trust. People's information is secure, and they are sent to google. No extra cookies are being set, and there's nothing surprising about google custom search, it's just a convenience to provide what we (and google) consider more relevant search results, and track a commercial agreement between Canonical and different search providers.

You are absolutely free to change the default home page to whatever you feel most comfortable with.

Martin: I clarified this in many places. Let's do this again.

The summary of my concern (and of others) is that the current search page looks like "google", as much as to induce your average user to think that he is searching on google.

It is not advertized on the page that the search engine is a custom one.

Ubuntu makes money out of the resulting advertizing, and the search results _can_ be altered by ubuntu, which is a smaller community than google. Users are now trusting ubuntu AND google, not google directly.

I am not saying this ain't no good to ubuntu. I am all for it, but not in the current form. Not hidden like a spypare usually is.

A honest search page would be exactly like the current one, but with a clear advertisement that the search engine is not google. Like everyone else using a CSE does. There should be a visible sentence, perhaps a bit below the search box, saying like "this page is a modified google. Searching trough this helps ubuntu." with a link to more information.

Instead, the current search page is designed to make one think that he is searching directly on the main search engine. Most users tend to think that ubuntu does only "good" things, and not "evil" ones (here evil is used in the sense of the famous "don't be evil" by google). This is because ubuntu advertises itself as such. This is the trust breakage as I perceive it.

My (not so) secret suspect is that the page is designed that way _precisely_ to advertise it as a standard google page, in order to minimize the number of users that change it. That /would/ be really evil, wouldn't it.

It *is* google and the results are not altered.
I'm sorry you feel insecure about this, but, again, as the project maintainer, this is an invalid bug. Please leave it that way.

Martin, as I opened this bug I think we should at least try to reach an agreement of its status before you employ your authority to close it.

I don't know if you have read the previous discussion, but this argument "it *is* google" has been already brought. Though, no one DARED replying to some simple questions, or just argumenting their claims. So no, just saying "it is google" does not suffice, you need to prove it. Otherwise, I could just claim that it's a KGB service (without being bound to proving it), and the discussion could go on forever.

Here are some simple questions:

0) If the search is google as you claim, why is the submit URL different? This is a rethorical question. Of course we all can see that the service provider is google, but in a very evident way, this IS NOT the google search service that we all use every day. It is a different service, called Custom Search Engine, which can be administered by an entity DIFFERENT THAN GOOGLE. However, the Google logo camps on the search box. That's what I find very wrong (and I can assure you, I am not the only one).

Let us get to real questions:

1) Is it true or not that ubuntu, *if* he or she wished, *could* alter these search results without the users knowing at all? I mean, is it true or not that a CSE can be customised to alter the search results? I think that's its main purpose. So, why should users NOT be informed that their data provider is google, but the results can be customised by ubuntu? Can you argument on this "why not"? I am *sure* most users would continue using the search form. They already trust ubuntu.

2) Is it true or not that ubuntu makes money from the CSE, by providing more advertising? I think this was made very clear in various places recently - probably this is the reason for not using yahoo in the end.

3) You seem the first developer in ages to care about this bug, can you provide an official justification of this fundamental issue: if you ARE making money by letting user search in YOUR CUSTOM SEARCH, why do you think that the users SHOULD not be informed? Just tell us.

I am open to an explanation, just provide it. Say: "there is no reason to inform the users that they are letting us make money, and that if we wanted we could alter their search result, even though I can swear we are not doing it. The reason for not letting users know is...". In all this time, I never saw such a simple sentence. I think someone ordered everyone to just avoid this discussion. But that's evident too.

Or otherwise, convince me that you are NOT making money or taking any advantage from the CSE, and that you COULD NOT alter these search results. This is going to be even more difficult :)

Or finally, recognise this bug, fix it in the simplest possible way (just a link to explanations in the page), and save your reputation.

Don't think I am trolling. I exposed myself (e.g. in my department when I was in Italy) in the past to encourage people to adopt ubuntu. I spent my time in helping people do the switch, and teaching them how to teach other people. I was seriously disappointed when I saw the wall of silence that lasted until your post. Because that means, the "hum...

"there is no reason to inform the users that they are letting us make money, and that if we wanted we could alter their search result, even though I can swear we are not doing it. The reason for not letting users know is..."

There isn't sufficient evidence to suggest users want or require this information.

When you turn on the tv or read a newspaper or a magazine, are you told every time there is an advertisement that the television channel/newspaper/magazine is making money from them?

Are you aware that every time you search using the search box in firefox you are making mozilla money? Does mozilla make you aware of this?

If we go to the yahoo.com homepage, there is nothing (at all) to advertise the fact that the yahoo search is a custom search engine built on bing.

If you visit any website on the internet, which has advertising on it, are you made aware that there is advertising on it and that by visiting the page you are potentially contributing to them making money, and would that be useful and informative, or annoying?

Argumentum ad populum...

With the ubuntu search on the start page the google logo is used to indicate the search results are from google, this is confirmed by the google.com in the url on the response page, this makes the google logo relevant.

If you remove the google logo and instead replace it with a custom ubuntu search logo you are presented with the trust issue you originally complained about, users would not be aware that by using the ubuntu search their information would be transferred to google and the results would be based on google, THAT would be an issue.

What does the ubuntu start page suggest?

That you are making a search using google, which you are, if the results are modified or artificially changed, then we need to take up with that particular issue, not the fact that they could do that, because if you take up the 'they could' then you would need an information notice on potentially every single application for every single potential issue, all you've done is chosen a particular issue with a particular thing.

Technically clicking on any of the ubuntu links down the bottom of the page 'could' take you to a page with malware on it, yet there is no warning about this, should we take up this issue?

I think you get the point.

What would be the best result?

Ubuntu homepage similar to http://www.google.com.au/firefox/ , with the same - direct from google - results page... but since this isn't going to happen, I'll just place this issue in the back of my mind where it can hopefully disappear.

IKT: you argument has many points of attack, so many that I honestly did not feel like replying. In private, if you wish. Let me just say that there are reasons why the following are for me two important principles in life:

1) use free software

2) never turn on the television (I have one because it's part of the furniture of my rented apartment).

But then, this bug has been solved in the right way:

http://start.ubuntu.com/11.04/

compare this to

http://start.ubuntu.com/10.04/

I am happy of this and re-started co-operation with ubuntu just yesterday, by reporting a bug.

It would be lovely if someone could comment on why the start page was finally changed (was it in response to complaints like this? was it because google required it?). But I don't really care.