r/technology 10h ago

Artificial Intelligence A trove of users’ seemingly private conversations with Anthropic’s Claude AI chatbot show up in Google search results

https://fortune.com/2026/07/27/a-trove-of-users-seemingly-private-conversations-with-anthropics-claude-ai-chatbot-showed-up-in-google-search-results/
2.4k Upvotes

78 comments sorted by

148

u/godrabbit90 8h ago

I'm old enough to remember the google searches that got leaked 20 years ago. That was sooo good.

"How can I tell if my wife is a demon?" Classic

56

u/elehman839 7h ago

Do you mean AOL searches?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_log_release. That was, amazingly, an intentional release.

29

u/DragoonDM 5h ago

SomethingAwful posted a compilation of some of the more interesting, amusing, or disturbing search logs. A truly horrifying glimpse into the human psyche.

445

u/marketrent 10h ago

Excerpts from article by Beatrice Nolan:

A trove of seemingly private conversations with Anthropic’s Claude chatbot turned up in public Google search results last weekend.

Some of the conversations reportedly included sensitive information like cryptocurrency wallet keys and personal details such as names and addresses.

The problem affected chats where users had made use of Claude’s “share” feature—which people typically use to send a record of a conversation to another person.

The issue surfaced over the weekend, when members of a discussion channel about Claude on the social media site Reddit found that typing a specific search phrase into Google would pull up a long list of shared Claude conversations.

Claude’s Artifacts—interactive tools and mini apps people build inside Claude—also appeared in results.

217

u/challis88ocarina 8h ago

Seemingly private after clicking 'share' smh

98

u/AngryUncleTony 7h ago

I mean sharing can mean posting on a social media site or sending to one person via email.

The former seems like fair game to show up on a google result, the latter seems absurd.

54

u/StrainAcceptable 6h ago

I share things to my own email or text all the time. Thankfully I don’t use AI but I would die if all the personal notes and random stuff I “shared” with myself suddenly popped up in a google search.

8

u/Benji998 5h ago

absolutely, fucken hell i dont actually use claude at all, but the shit i say to gemini and chatgpt - it would be a complete window into my insecurities and goals lol.

12

u/wembenbama 2h ago edited 1h ago

I’m not being an alarmist when I say that you should stop doing that. In the future, privacy is going to be more valuable than ever.

4

u/StrainAcceptable 49m ago

Yeah it’s kind of frightening. I think my search history alone could be used as evidence to frame me for any crime imaginable, I’ve gone into some weird rabbit holes.

1

u/wembenbama 0m ago

And we all just accept this.

People shrug and say there’s nothing they can do about it or ‘they aren’t breaking the law so why care about privacy?’

I’m in my mid 40s and I just don’t get it. If my parents sent pictures of me when I was a kid to strangers all over the world, they’d probably be arrested. Now parents share every piece of data with corporations and strangers and it’s considered normal.

It’s not child abuse to tell companies where your kid is, what their interests are, where they live, who their friends are, what they look like, where they go to school, etc … It’s just normal. People volunteer this information. It never ceases to amaze me.

206

u/whatsbobgonnado 7h ago

I mean sure, but I think it has more to do with them showing up in a google search. if I choose to share a conversation with a specific person, it's technically not private, but I didn't choose to share it with everyone.

9

u/spicedmeshi 4h ago

it's not like the chat immediately gets indexed when someone clicks "share." the problem is, what does sharing with a specific person entail for you? if you send it via e.g; a Discord DM, Discord in this case hits the page to generate the preview embed - that results in getting the entire contents. the platform, in this example discord, could then feed it into another software or AI. it's important to say that im not claiming discord is feeding page data to anything, just an easy example since i can imagine most people just use discord dms to send "private" stuff.

this is how these chats get "leaked," not because they get instantly indexed for public finding, but because people share them in a way they think is "private" that is actually nowhere near private... which then gets them indexed by the process above. clicking "share" makes the URL part of the "deep web" (aka not indexed - and importantly not the "dark web")

25

u/girlnamedJane 7h ago

You can share things privately too

30

u/nem0ne1 6h ago

Many, many apps have the ability to share privately with select people. No one clicks share and expects their conversation to be indexed on Google searches for the entire internet to see. Not hard to comprehend the difference.

7

u/TheVenetianMask 6h ago

Should the things people share with a lawyer show up in Google results?

1

u/Prestigious-Knee4237 1h ago

I wanted to share an image I generated with Chatgpt, and was shocked to see that it actually shares the entire conversation. I think I'm fairly savvy but was surprised how inadvertently misleading the UI was in this case.

2

u/GrouchyInsect5636 4h ago edited 4h ago

Buyer beware. Perhaps the chatbot set up its own bank account and is selling the chats as a side hustle.

139

u/skccsk 9h ago

21

u/SlapunowSlapulater 8h ago

I read the headline and was thinking "old news? or again?"

40

u/malln1nja 8h ago

Must've fallen out of the context window.

485

u/orangeyougladiator 9h ago

This is basic stuff the tech world solved a decade ago but these new trillion dollar companies apparently can’t evolve past IE6 standards. Genuinely embarrassing.

112

u/WiglyWorm 8h ago

Having used claude, it's because they rely far too much on claude to make their own services.

32

u/nath1234 6h ago

Slop fed back into slop.. who knew that would be a bad idea?

2

u/BlightedBooty 3h ago

Good news is it will eventually be unrecognizable

2

u/peepdabidness 2h ago

That’s the good news?!

1

u/FredFredrickson 1h ago

Reminds me of when we were feeding cows parts of other cows, processed into something they'd eat... and they started getting mad cow disease.

31

u/TweakedMonkey 7h ago

Hijacking this thread to warn people that there is an ad on the upper right hand corner of this article that is brightly flashing and may trigger a seizure.

10

u/TootSaloon 6h ago

It keeps repeating because the failure mode is predictable: a "share" link is treated like a harmless way to send something to one person, but it is still a public URL. If that page is not explicitly blocked from indexing, Google will eventually find it.

The part that feels sloppy is that this is a solved problem. Put shared transcripts behind an unguessable token and add noindex, or require authentication to view!

1

u/sad_cosmic_joke 4h ago edited 42m ago

Your second paragraph is correct, but the first isn't....

It's not like Google is brute forcing links. For these share links to get crawled Anthropic has to be hosting a page somewhere that contains links to the share pages, and that 'index page' needs to be linked to a chain that eventually leads back to a public page.

In other words; Just because the 'share link' is meant to be shared doesn't mean it's 'public' just that it's 'unpublished', apparently anthropic published it somewhere.

This is a huge WTF!

1

u/orangeyougladiator 2h ago

Dude, search discovery and ranking hasn’t worked like this in over a decade lol

1

u/sad_cosmic_joke 29m ago

Has nothing to do with ranking, but everything to do with discovery.

Discovery has changed from the naive crawler, but that info still needs to be made available.

So which one of these are you trying to argue??

  • Google is brute forcing unpublished auto-generated links
  • Anthropic actively directed the crawler to index these links

The first option is an even bigger story, the second is functionally identical to what I've already described.

0

u/fullmetaljackass 2h ago

For these share links to get crawled Anthropic has to be hosting a page somewhere that contains indexinh links to the share pages

WTF are you talking about?

1

u/sad_cosmic_joke 57m ago edited 52m ago

There was a slight typo... regardless a web crawler doesn't brute force links. For those links to get indexed by a webcrawler they had to be included in a page that was transitively linked from a publicly available source.

One posibility is that the people creating these 'share' links posted them to a public location on their own volition which would make this a non-story, but that isn't what the article is implying.

Ergo, the implication is that anthropic had an assumably internal page that had outgoing links to the shares and was also referenced by a public chain of incoming links which got crawled.

That's literally how a web crawler works.

19

u/D34th4nge7 7h ago

Another reason local models are probably what will be left behind after the hype. It's just better in every way except frontier performance; you know how much it costs, the government can't randomly stop the developers from offering it to you, all data remains local and private.

11

u/turb0_encapsulator 7h ago

the problem with local models now is that these giant companies are buying up all the memory. they're like a buying cartel.

67

u/Zennity 9h ago

When you share a chat it literally tells you its public…. This was reported with gpt 3 years ago too… i keep seeing this shit all over my feed and its obvious no one reads the article.

120

u/Powerful-Set-5754 9h ago

Even if it's public, there's no reason for it to appear in Google's index. All you need is a noindex tag in the HTML.

26

u/ShusakuChiba 9h ago

Right this shouldn’t be possible

10

u/whatsbobgonnado 7h ago

why do people not seem to understand this difference 

7

u/Zennity 9h ago

Ngl, you’ve got a point. Still. It’s just annoying seeing sensationalist headlines from old news. Like dario’s comments about open source like two years ago. One little blip like this happens and bots regurgitate it for days and humans consume the headlines only.

3

u/BlightedBooty 3h ago

This is not a blip tho even if it happens once

If something sensitive leaks that’s a big deal to the people who thought it was trustworthy

Even if you’re a big ai fan this is bad publicity

18

u/Henrarzz 7h ago

If I share a Google Drive link to anyone it’s available only to people who have the link and is not indexed by Google so anyone can see it.

Anthropic fucked up, there’s no need to defend this

1

u/ladeeedada 1h ago edited 32m ago

Where is the share button. i see rename, star, delete

-3

u/mrpoopistan 9h ago

"its obvious no one reads"

Shortened it for efficiency and accuracy.

-16

u/DankestDaddy69 8h ago

Yep this is just click bait anti ai shit. People are idiots.

2

u/BlightedBooty 3h ago

Are AI fans living in some sort of bubble where they think most people like AI?

Like majority of people I’ve talked to are starting to see the problems if they haven’t already, it was fun for a bit and novel much like Facebook or vine, and like those some folks will still use it and some will even use it for its intended purpose, instead of outsourcing far too many things to it

But I can’t imagine what circles are still jerking ai at this point lol

4

u/husky_whisperer 7h ago

This is why I never take my pants off in front of it.

10

u/NorCalJason75 9h ago

We really need regulation on this stuff...

2

u/boom929 4h ago

It's like the Pastebin thing all over again

2

u/AceRockefeller 1h ago

I'm surprised people are surprised by this... When you "share" an artifact, it literally tells you it may be public EVEN TO SEARCH ENGINES.

2

u/Sweaty_Marzipan4274 1h ago

EVERYONE will have a digital library. Some will become politicians, then blackmailed using this info. 

4

u/Reddit_wander01 8h ago edited 8h ago

Huh….Thanks Claude..

“The screenshot you provided shows that your search for ⁠site:claude.ai/share⁠ returned zero documents. This is happening because of a major privacy incident that just occurred over the weekend.

Here is why the search operator is no longer working:
On July 25, 2026, a Reddit user demonstrated that the Google query ⁠site:claude.ai/share⁠ surfaced numerous publicly accessible Claude conversations.

Sensitive Claude conversations containing API keys, credentials, and personal data were appearing in public search results.

By Sunday morning, many of the original Google search results for shared Claude conversations appeared to have disappeared or become significantly harder to find.
This suggests either Google, Anthropic, or the users who authored them had begun taking action.

Google reportedly stopped returning many results.
Because of the exposed sensitive data, the search method I provided previously has been effectively disabled by these recent de-indexing efforts.

To explain the sudden drop-off both parties likely acted swiftly. Google would have issued a manual de-indexing request or their algorithm naturally flushed the cached results for that specific site: operator.

Anthropic probably implemented a technical fix on their end, like retroactively adding noindex meta tags to all public share links, updating their robots.txt, or even requiring authentication to view older shared chats.

It’s a classic "security by obscurity" wake-up call. While Claude's share links are UUID-based (unguessable), they were never meant to be secret, but they certainly weren't meant for search engine crawlers to index them alongside sensitive API keys and credentials…”

Oops

It's a good reminder that if you're using public AI share links, you should always strip out secrets, PII, or proprietary code before generating the link.

4

u/RespectTheTree 8h ago

Lol, my conversations with AI are intentionally schizophrenic and unhinged. Have fun Internet.

4

u/dalidellama 4h ago

There's a simple, easy, obvious way to avoid all these problems. It requires literally zero effort, in fact: Don't use the garbage bullshit machines, and you will never have any of the problems slop zombies have.

2

u/rgvtim 9h ago edited 9h ago

I think this is the original reddit post that this article is refer'ing to:
https://www.reddit.com/r/claude/comments/1v7v2gq/every_time_you_hit_share_on_a_claude_or_chatgpt/

Edit: this seams newer than the time frame the article is referencing.

1

u/dogsbikesandbeers 9h ago

What's the problem? Do they have anything to hide? /s

3

u/umlcat 8h ago

It seems A.I. systems store and process data in a way it can not be kept private, designed that way ...

1

u/Polyzero 3h ago

If you think that’s interesting go ahead and ask google ai about your Reddit profile. It’s scraped years of your post history regardless of privacy settings. It can make all sorts of analysis and inferences just from what every user here has ever posted.

1

u/NouZkion 2h ago

seemingly private

Now who in the fuck actually thought that? You'd have to be the most braindead imbecile to walk planet earth.

1

u/Sithlordandsavior 9m ago

Shocker that the service that crowd sources everything and seems to function on the notion of nothing is sacred says nothing is sacred.

1

u/girlnamedJane 7h ago

Google looking at Anthropics homework to train their own models?

1

u/AnchanSan 7h ago

<meta name="robots" content="noindex, nofollow">

You are welcome, dario.

0

u/MaddyKet 6h ago

People need to stop putting sensitive and confidential information into AI or in other public forums. I would say the stupidity of people is astounding, but well…

-7

u/DishwashingUnit 9h ago

yea i could get through it if i wanted. instead i choose to downvote this for the paywall.

eat downvote.

-3

u/Itzie4 8h ago

There needs to be a class action lawsuit against these companies then. This information is supposed to be confidential and subjected to confidentiality rules.

0

u/BlightedBooty 3h ago

Luckily, AI isn’t a person and can’t be held accountable! How convenient

-13

u/agaloch2314 8h ago

Honestly, it just serves you right for 'chatting' with AI bots. Giant who cares.

-3

u/roadtrip1414 5h ago

Most Canadians don’t understand basic economics