Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

news.ycombinator.com

51–60 of 110 posts

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#51
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if you put the “reject all”, button behind a “customize cookie settings” click, you’re a bad, anti-social person.

How would you save the "reject all" selection without using a cookie for that user's session?

I think you don't need a cookie for that. You can use localStorage which is local to the user's device.

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how server side analytics works without cookies?

You can use IP based tracking or something like a query parameter to track within that session

You're describing a session cookie. Changing the technique slightly doesn't allow you to bypass the law.

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out that I answered the question even if not using cookies is not an option. But to elaborate a bit: At least in Germany (and I believe this applies more or less everywhere) if you install a 1st-party tracking method based on 1st-party cookies, that doesn't fall under the 3rd-party consent requirement and you don't need consent. That means you can track your valuable retention numbers and won't need…

If you're doing 1st-party tracking, and you are collecting personal data for that purpose (which is almost by definition going to be true), and the user hasn't explicitly asked for that tracking to take place (for instance by creating an account and logging in, or by putting items in a shopping basket and expecting them to be retained) then yes you will need to ask for consent to do that tracking. The test isn't whet…

I was referring to the grey area of legitimate interest in the law and how I was briefed to interpret it ca. 2021. Things may have moved on and I am not a lawyer. You might be right and what the lawyers told me back then isn't true or was true and is no longer considered true.

What I was basically saying is that 1st-party cookies are considered more likely to reflect a legitimate interest than 3rd-party cookies. And I think that is what the interpretation of the law was (or maybe still is).

You can do 1st-party tracking without collecting personally identifiable information if it's just about retention without a user ID, which I was referring to. And I in fact think that there is a case to be made that this could be part of the legitimate interests of improving the user experience on a web property of a given business, hence not requiring consent.

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#54
From user's POV: if you do have to ask for cookies, please make the "reject all" button object to all "legitimate interests", so I don't have to manually expand each "purpose" to object. I won't use the site unless I object to all. If it's too big of a hassle at that moment , I'll just leave and not come back

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#55
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out that I answered the question even if not using cookies is not an option. But to elaborate a bit: At least in Germany (and I believe this applies more or less everywhere) if you install a 1st-party tracking method based on 1st-party cookies, that doesn't fall under the 3rd-party consent requirement and you don't need consent. That means you can track your valuable retention numbers and won't need…

This is completely false. You need permission for any data you store on a user device or retrieve from a user device if that is not strictly needed for the execution of the service the user requested. Nowhere in the law is the word "cookie" even used, so your suggestion that "1st party cookie" is different from "3rd party cookie" is wrong. And similarly, this whole thing also applies to all alternative tracking metho…

This is what is false. You can use first party tracking using cookies, local storage, indexdb, whatever you like without consent as long as it is not tied to any PII and it is essential for _operating_ your service. Diagnostics, page views, flows through the app, even with a unique identifier for that session is fine and 100% acceptable for both GDPR and CCPA unless its shared with third-parties or tied directly to PII.

The easiest thing to do here, is to simply not associate those sessions with a particular user. Even if your user accounts are tied to specific PII for essential purposes of your app. As long as the tracking data is not connected to that identifier, does not log any PII data on it own, and is not shared with third parties you do not need consent.

One quick edit: Be careful with collecting errors, its easy for backtraces to include application specific data including any PII you might have which will tie that session back to a specific user and becomes a violation.

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#56
If you have a one-click "no to all" for people like me, and a one-click "yes to all" for people who just want to get on with their lives, and both buttons are the same shape/size/color and easily clickable, then you're already waaaaay ahead of the curve.

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you save the "reject all" selection without using a cookie for that user's session?

I think you don't need a cookie for that. You can use localStorage which is local to the user's device.

It doesn't matter what method you use. Saving the information on the user's device and making them potentially identifiable is what counts.

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#58
post #43
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> even if you just want to calculate retention or unique visitors. Why is it so hard to for people to understand that I just want you to serve me the page and bugger off? It's like justifying embedding GPS tracking in pamphlets that people hand out on the street. I don't want to be tracked period. Is it that hard?

Exactly. Is it your business to track people? There’s 90% chance that no, it’s not your business. There’s also a lot of chances that your website is about a product. In which case, it doesn’t make sense to know how many people come and read. People only need the information to know "will I buy that or not?" or, even more frequently "I’ve bought that but I don’t understand something". Tracking is counterproductive in…

Europe's parliament website[1] uses cookie banner, even though its job is literally to just show information. If they want to track visitors any non trivial site would.

[1]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/portal/en

Re: Ask HN: What is the least obnoxious way to ask for cookie permissions?

#59
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except this is not the question. Why is it so hard for people to understand cookies are absolutely needed even if you just want to calculate retention or number of unique visitors.

> even if you just want to calculate retention or unique visitors. Why is it so hard to for people to understand that I just want you to serve me the page and bugger off? It's like justifying embedding GPS tracking in pamphlets that people hand out on the street. I don't want to be tracked period. Is it that hard?

Your opinion is comprehensible from a user's standpoint.

Once you have worked a while in business or marketing, you will see that it's not that easy unfortunately.

There's a lot of pressure to provide certain numbers or at least to collect them "just to be sure". Typically this requirement comes without any willingness to invest money, because "you can just install Google Analytics for free".

I don't want to justify this at all, because I believe in the long run these numbers aren't worth what people claim they are worth at all. I just wanted to explain that not everyone is "bad" or "anti-social" for complying with "leadership" decisions and installing a CMP and Google Analytics.

Post reply on HN