I think the danger is that while Mozilla’s relationship with google is well known, they would certainly be in danger of losing trust across the internet if it was felt that they were providing too much user data to Google.

If Firefox user privacy protection was a real concern for Mozilla the data-sharing agreement agreement would read something like:

“While it is possible that a URL sent to your service provider may itself contain Personally-Identifying Information, Mozilla’s third party service providers have entered into a written agreement with Mozilla not to use Personally-Identifying Information, which will only be temporarily stored for a 30 day period before deletion”.

What comes across most in some of the above comments is that some people are more concerned about the public image of Mozilla, as opposed to the the protection of Mozilla users. I really can’t subscribe to that as a valid argument.

Has No One CHECKED ANY FACTS Before publishing or commenting on a “story” Like This??

Is this type of misinformation indicative of “Platinax” or Journalism in General right now?

It’s simply one of two things;

(a)Malicious, Harmful distortions designed to Hurt Mozilla, OR

(b)Laziness.

You Choose.

Just about everything in the article is wrong. As it turns out, even if you take no action, you will automatically have antiphishing protection that is updated EVERY 30 TO 60 MINUTES, and NO information is sent to Google or anyone else! I have to wait a week for antivirus signatures.

If you want even better, super-express service, you can opt to ask Google if the URLs are OK. Unlike most EULAs, this one is brief, clear, and readable. If you don’t like it, do nothing and you’ll still be protected.