SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
European Authorities Ban Dirty Cookie Practices in GDPR Update:
When GDPR rolled out across the European Union back in 2018, the sweeping legal framework pledged to bring consumer privacy and protection to the forefront. In the years since then, we've seen the adtech industry at large do its collective darnedest to undermine these laws at every turn, and largely get away with it, thanks in part to the squishy phrasing of some of the legislation's most critical clauses.
Now, European authorities are stepping in to cut that squishiness a bit. On Monday, the European Data Protection Board—the Union's oversight committee for GDPR-related issues—released a 31-page manual (pdf) calling out some of the slimier practices used by adtech companies to fudge consent on an internet browser's behalf.
These new guidelines specifically call out the sites that assume a user's agreement to be tracked and targeted based on say, the way they scroll down a webpage, rather than relying on their explicit agreement to that deal. Also called out in the memo are "cookie walls"—a cute name for the not-so-cute tactic where sites bar internet browsers from accessing their content unless they agree to allowing cookies and trackers on the site.
These are both tactics that directly step on the concept of user consent. [...] GDPR was written to require that websites garner a visitor's consent before they handle that visitor's data, and before they pass that data down the garbled supply chain of third parties in the adtech ecosystem. As you might imagine, the GDPR painstakingly lays out exactly what does and doesn't qualify as consent, requiring that, in short, these websites explain the tech used to track the visitors in a clear and upfront way. It also requires that they offer these visitors an easy way to opt in or out of this sort of on-page tech.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Mojibake Tengu on Thursday May 07 2020, @02:09PM (5 children)
The wrong is on browsers mechanics and crappy protocols design.
Web transfer logic has no proper topological closure. That leaves user vulnerable to unwanted information flow.
A consistent page should never allow loading any of out-of-domain resources.
Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by gtomorrow on Thursday May 07 2020, @02:27PM (2 children)
Thus negating the entire concept of hypertext. Nice!
I think Rupert Murdoch was also in favor a similar design.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Mojibake Tengu on Thursday May 07 2020, @03:04PM (1 child)
Not true. A hyperlink is a transfer of location, and should not be misused as a transfer of data.
Its meaning shall be "let's go there" and not "throw at me whatever you want".
Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
(Score: 2) by gtomorrow on Thursday May 07 2020, @03:37PM
You are absolutely correct. I had forgotten that that was the original intent before it got subverted/subjugated.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 07 2020, @02:54PM
Which is how several of the plugins I use work, only load third party content if I have consented.
But if the target web server would tunnel the traffic to ad and tracking services, most of the browser privacy tools would be bypassed. I don't know why sites would not be doing some of this.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 07 2020, @05:32PM
"The wrong is on browsers mechanics and crappy protocols design"
There have been people saying that since the 90's, and it's true. People don't understand the value of what they've lost. I'm sure in China they already use cell phones to round up dissidents and stick them in concentration camps. Probably other countries too. The inability to communicate anonymously chills speech. I remember the crazy shit people used to say on usenet. These days, it is rare to find people speaking openly in a dissident way online. We aren't at risk of having chilled speech, we already have it.
Eventually some nutroll is going to take their personal privacy seriously. There will be blood and a great deal of wrending of garments. The news will call the person insane, and attribute the event to the person not being adequately tracked by the state. They will be famous and the same people who have been actively subverting civil rights in the press, will then write books about the whole thing. It will be a best seller for a while.
The thing is, it is kind of hard to make a villian out of a vigalante if everybody hates the guy that got whacked. That is why it will make such a good story. I know I will buy a copy.