Google’s fingerprinting U-Turn: A fragmented and troubling shift in privacy principles
In a policy update published on December 18, 2024, Google announced that, starting February 16, 2025, it would no longer prohibit fingerprinting across its advertising platforms. This update marks an extreme U-Turn from Google’s previous privacy commitments and raises serious concerns about the consistency of its approach to user data.
The policy update
In its updated policy documentation, Google claims the change reflects advancements in “privacy-enhancing technologies” that mitigate risks associated with fingerprinting. Fingerprinting, a method that aggregates various device signals—such as screen size, IP address, and browser settings—into a unique identifier, is now permitted as long as these signals are handled securely and responsibly.
Google positions the update as a way to support emerging advertising channels, like connected TV (CTV), where traditional tracking methods are less viable. However, this justification starkly contrasts with Google’s 2019 stance, where fingerprinting was explicitly criticized as opaque, invasive, and incompatible with user choice.
Contradictory signals from within
This policy change isn’t just a shift—it’s a complete U-turn that creates a great inconsistency within Google. While teams like Chrome and Privacy Sandbox have publicly committed to reducing invasive tracking and fostering a privacy-first internet, the advertising side of Google is loosening restrictions on one of the most opaque tracking methods available.
The fragmentation of Google’s privacy strategy is troubling. At a company of this scale, decisions about user data should align with core principles applied consistently across the organization. Instead, competing business priorities seem to be driving decisions in silos, eroding trust in Google’s commitment to privacy.
Industry reactions
Predictably, reactions to Google’s announcement have been divided. Advertisers and industry trade groups are pleased with the change, framing it as an opportunity to innovate in a fragmented ecosystem.
Meanwhile, privacy advocates and regulators have raised alarms. The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) criticized the policy as “irresponsible” and warned businesses not to view fingerprinting as a simple replacement for third-party cookies. Stephen Almond, the ICO’s Executive Director for Regulatory Risk, emphasized that fingerprinting must comply with strict data protection laws, including transparency, user consent, and the right to erasure—criteria that are nearly impossible to meet with fingerprinting’s inherent opacity.
A step backwards for privacy
At C Wire, we view Google’s policy change as a step backward for privacy and a troubling signal to the advertising industry. Fingerprinting is built on a foundation of invisibility, making it inherently incompatible with the principles of transparency and user control.
This move not only undermines years of progress toward a more privacy-conscious internet but also exposes a deeper issue within Google: its inability to maintain a unified stance on privacy. Decisions like this create confusion across the ecosystem and damage trust in Google as a leader in responsible advertising.
The need for consistency and innovation
The advertising industry doesn’t need more U-turns or fragmented approaches. It needs cohesive, forward-thinking solutions that prioritize privacy without compromising effectiveness. At C Wire, we have built a platform designed for the future: a cookieless, AI-driven targeting solution that respects user privacy, delivers transparency, and empowers advertisers to thrive in a privacy-first world.
Unlike fingerprinting, our approach relies on signals unrelated to the user, not invasive tracking. This ensures that advertisers can achieve their goals while users maintain control over their data.
The bigger picture
Google’s decision may offer short-term advantages for advertisers, but it risks long-term damage to the industry’s reputation, again. Regulators, privacy advocates, and consumers are paying closer attention than ever, and tolerance for invasive practices like fingerprinting is decreasing.
If the industry is to rebuild trust, companies must commit to principles of transparency and privacy—and apply those principles consistently. It’s time for the advertising ecosystem, and Google, to choose a better path forward. (it’s been time for a while)
