Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

themarkup.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 106 posts

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#71

Post by arp242 »

eli wrote: post #67
Sephr wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TypeKit does indeed send tracking data back to Adobe through the domain p.typekit.net. This is also likely reflected in Adobe's privacy policy. Luckily, it is possible to use Content-Security-Policy or client-side scripts to block this domain while allowing use.typekit.net, which simply hosts the font files.

Like I said, they keep track of font usage. The billing is based on usage. That domain sets no cookies and the privacy policy doesn't permit the data to be used for ads: https://www.adobe.com/privacy/policies/adobe-fonts.html It's not ad tech. I think this is the problem with the "high score" approach to measuring the privacy impact of a site. Number of third-party cookies or "trackers" is not a great proxy for how w…

"Tracking" is almost a weasel word these days. What matters is what is tracks. Tracking some things is just fine, IMO.

The problem now is a lack of trust, not the least of which because there's often not that much transparency and very little accountability in the way of law, as well as various actors that constantly try to skirt the line (i.e. Facebook, Google, etc.)

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#72

Post by Sephr »

eli wrote: post #67
Sephr wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TypeKit does indeed send tracking data back to Adobe through the domain p.typekit.net. This is also likely reflected in Adobe's privacy policy. Luckily, it is possible to use Content-Security-Policy or client-side scripts to block this domain while allowing use.typekit.net, which simply hosts the font files.

Like I said, they keep track of font usage. The billing is based on usage. That domain sets no cookies and the privacy policy doesn't permit the data to be used for ads: https://www.adobe.com/privacy/policies/adobe-fonts.html It's not ad tech. I think this is the problem with the "high score" approach to measuring the privacy impact of a site. Number of third-party cookies or "trackers" is not a great proxy for how w…

I've observed requests to p.typekit.com that appear to have high-entropy identifiers in GET parameters, so I would still consider it potential user tracking.

> Like I said, they keep track of font usage. The billing is based on usage.

Adobe should be measuring usage based on referrers to their CDN.

> the privacy policy doesn't permit [...]

I'd prefer no tracking at all instead of trusting the goodwill of a company to follow through with its privacy policy.

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#75

Post by traspler »

arp242 wrote: post #70
traspler wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

39 Trackers | 91 Third-Party Cookies | Evading Trackers | (Possible) Keystroke & Mouse Monitoring https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=arstechnica.com

At least Ars will allow you to disable almost all of that if you subscribe. I mean, they've got to pay their staff somehow, and if it's not subscriptions or ads then how?

Maybe it's naive to think that even when showing Ads or collecting usage data, there has to come a point of questionable returns. I struggle with accepting that showing Ads and collecting usage data involves nearly 40 different collectors/trackers.

I do get the allure of cross-channel tracking and personalized Ads but maybe good enough could be reached differently.

I don't categorically reject Ads and data collection but the current data hunger is insatiable with little visible benefit to me.

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#76

Post by specialist »

arp242 wrote: post #69
fxtentacle wrote: post #11

I feel like we should unify the copyright and privacy laws. If I copy a Disney movie without their knowledge and then extract value from it, for example by watching the movie without paying, everyone agrees that this is theft. And punishment is generally strong to excessive. If a website copies my private data without my knowledge or even after I decline permission by sending DNT headers, that is somehow considered c…

What is "private data"? Is your hair colour private data? Is the browser you use private data? Why? Or why not? Does it matter if I only record hair colour and the browser you use, or if I combine it with other data? These kind of things may sound okay superficially, but once you start defining things clearly in a way that can be incorporated in a workable law things get very hard very fast. Copyright, on the other h…

Privacy is real simple:

Control over my public persona.

Property rights is real simple:

Pay me. If you're making a buck off my data, I want my cut.

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#77

Post by specialist »

raspyberr wrote: post #31
fxtentacle wrote: post #11

I feel like we should unify the copyright and privacy laws. If I copy a Disney movie without their knowledge and then extract value from it, for example by watching the movie without paying, everyone agrees that this is theft. And punishment is generally strong to excessive. If a website copies my private data without my knowledge or even after I decline permission by sending DNT headers, that is somehow considered c…

Why would you unify two unrelated things? I think privacy is a right and copyright is so overstretched it literally works against its original intention. As an aside, the only part of "Intellectual Property" as an idea that I agree with is the right for an author to claim that they authored something. It shoudln't give them a right to control how its distributed or what people do with it. Why would you compare the ri…

To simplify the bookkeeping. When all data about me is mine, everything else falls into place.

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#78

Post by arp242 »

specialist wrote: post #76
arp242 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is "private data"? Is your hair colour private data? Is the browser you use private data? Why? Or why not? Does it matter if I only record hair colour and the browser you use, or if I combine it with other data? These kind of things may sound okay superficially, but once you start defining things clearly in a way that can be incorporated in a workable law things get very hard very fast. Copyright, on the other h…

Privacy is real simple: Control over my public persona. Property rights is real simple: Pay me. If you're making a buck off my data, I want my cut.

That doesn't define "privacy" or "public persona". This is the tricky bit.

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#79

Post by arrosenberg »

kube-system wrote: post #24
fxtentacle wrote: post #11

I feel like we should unify the copyright and privacy laws. If I copy a Disney movie without their knowledge and then extract value from it, for example by watching the movie without paying, everyone agrees that this is theft. And punishment is generally strong to excessive. If a website copies my private data without my knowledge or even after I decline permission by sending DNT headers, that is somehow considered c…

Copyright protects the creator of a work, not the subject of it. Additionally, it applies to creative works, not bare facts. The fact that "John Smith's IP address is 127.0.0.1" is neither creative, nor something John Smith created.

So by your logic, my parents should be able to sue data mining companies to vindicate their copyright claim on my data?

Re: Blacklight – A Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector

#80

Post by itronitron »

kube-system wrote: post #24
fxtentacle wrote: post #11

I feel like we should unify the copyright and privacy laws. If I copy a Disney movie without their knowledge and then extract value from it, for example by watching the movie without paying, everyone agrees that this is theft. And punishment is generally strong to excessive. If a website copies my private data without my knowledge or even after I decline permission by sending DNT headers, that is somehow considered c…

Copyright protects the creator of a work, not the subject of it. Additionally, it applies to creative works, not bare facts. The fact that "John Smith's IP address is 127.0.0.1" is neither creative, nor something John Smith created.

When I surf the information superhighway I create a unique data trail which is a unique expression created by me. I therefore claim copyright over the content of that data trail.
Post reply on HN