Live data from Hacker News

I don't care about cookies

i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu

141–150 of 193 posts

Re: I don't care about cookies

#141
post #7

The consent popups you see aren't just about cookies though. They want (and sometimes illegally force) you to consent to processing of your personal information for reasons beyond just providing you with a service (or more commonly just reading an article). Cookies might be one technical means to assist with that, but it's not the only means.

Yes, I can't fathom why the hate is on the law, and not the companies now being exposed by the law.. Seriously, if you don't do shady shit your site doesn't need a popup asking for consent. But even Github has misunderstood it's not about the cookies. They had an article earlier about removing the popup since they managed to do stuff without cookies. The law doesn't care about cookies, it cares about tracking and ill…

> if you don't do shady shit your site doesn't need a popup asking for consent.

This what I have been explained. Any sort data sharing, like introducing Google Analytics in your website and you need a disclaimer.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#142
post #7

The consent popups you see aren't just about cookies though. They want (and sometimes illegally force) you to consent to processing of your personal information for reasons beyond just providing you with a service (or more commonly just reading an article). Cookies might be one technical means to assist with that, but it's not the only means.

Yes, I can't fathom why the hate is on the law, and not the companies now being exposed by the law.. Seriously, if you don't do shady shit your site doesn't need a popup asking for consent. But even Github has misunderstood it's not about the cookies. They had an article earlier about removing the popup since they managed to do stuff without cookies. The law doesn't care about cookies, it cares about tracking and ill…

>Yes, I can't fathom why the hate is on the law, and not the companies now being exposed by the law.

Because it's clearly not easy to run a service without these types of practices. If you want to get ad revenue then you have to have them.

Even the EU commission's own website has the pop up: https://europa.eu/

And they don't even have to worry about paying the bills for the website.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR is sooo easy to follow as a startup. Just gather the data you need and not everything else,and ask for consent. If anything, it was the big players getting work to do. Thousands of people on mailing lists with no control of how they got there. Asked and kept insane amounts of not necessary data. Data floating in hundreds of database tables spread over various services and third party vendors and data centers wit…

It really isn't that easy. Something like an IP address is considered personally identifiable information, and most web servers and frameworks log that by default. If you really want to comply it takes quite a bit of effort you are not accidentally logging IP addresses somewhere. You can argue you need that info for the operation of your site, but it's been established that you would still need to ask permission in t…

I don’t think the only factor considered is whether or not something is PII, rather even the intent is considered.

If you were storing IP addresses to track and market to users, you need consent.

If you’re using them for logging and security purposes, I think that falls under legitimate interest.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is something like having Google Analytics on your site "shady shit"? I would think counting unique visitors is a legitimate business interest for most businesses. And there is no way to do that without a cookie, or without storing IP address (which is considered personally identifiable info). The law could have been much better if it simply asked browser makers to provide a single place to configure your preferen…

There was a simple place — Do Not Track (DNT), ignored by industry. Truly open culture does not accept tracking, for example there is no way to count Linux users. And people would not be kin to those who track physical news papers. Meanwhile I use uMatrix and uBlock Origin.

DNT never worked - and never could, because it had no legal backing.

What happened was entirely predictable to anyone who understands how the market works: there were some volunteers who honored DNT while it was opt-in, but that mostly ended when one of the browsers decided to make sending DNT enabled by default.

The industry wasn't, isn't, and is never going to self-regulate itself out of a significant revenue stream. That's why we ended up with GDPR - a proper solution with legal backing - which almost works. It would be working, if EU member states were more eager to pursue violations and issue fines.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I can't fathom why the hate is on the law, and not the companies now being exposed by the law.. Seriously, if you don't do shady shit your site doesn't need a popup asking for consent. But even Github has misunderstood it's not about the cookies. They had an article earlier about removing the popup since they managed to do stuff without cookies. The law doesn't care about cookies, it cares about tracking and ill…

> Yes, I can't fathom why the hate is on the law, and not the companies now being exposed by the law. Because it's clearly not easy to run a service without these types of practices. If you want to get ad revenue then you have to have them. Even the EU commission's own website has the pop up: https://europa.eu/ And they don't even have to worry about paying the bills for the website.

The EU's site is actually a pretty nice example. The banner is small, non-obtrusive and simple. It has the positive and negative options on equal footing. I don't think many would complain about that.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is something like having Google Analytics on your site "shady shit"? I would think counting unique visitors is a legitimate business interest for most businesses. And there is no way to do that without a cookie, or without storing IP address (which is considered personally identifiable info). The law could have been much better if it simply asked browser makers to provide a single place to configure your preferen…

There was a simple place — Do Not Track (DNT), ignored by industry. Truly open culture does not accept tracking, for example there is no way to count Linux users. And people would not be kin to those who track physical news papers. Meanwhile I use uMatrix and uBlock Origin.

Truly open culture does not accept tracking

The purpose of the tracking matters, though. Truly open culture also doesn't attempt fraud, DoS attacks, data breaches, and all the other nasty things that some people who are hoping not to get caught and punished do online. Unless you can prevent all such threats, it's unreasonable to expect websites whose operators might be held responsible for the consequences not to monitor how their own systems are being used and who is using them.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhh, that's bad. Come to think of it, a malicious company could probably set up their systems so they get auto-confirmed by the plugin. I'm not sure they'd be valid in that case. Similar attacks: load the fine print via JS and stick it into an /ads/advertisement.js so adblockers will block the loading of it. Can the company claim "we showed it to the user, if their software hides it, that's not our problem"?

No, the user did not consent. They have to be aware of such systems not game it. The intent and the consent have to be clear to both parties. Agreement is about respect not about malice. If an consent is maliciously hidden away, no matter how technically then it's not valid. Law is not binary in these cases, it's all about the circumstance.

That's what I figure, but how does that work for e.g. Cookie Consent? The user has a plugin that just clicks "Accept" on the consent overlay. They don't read the consent, they're not aware of what they consent to specifically.

Is their (or their plugin's, acting as their agent) consent valid because they know about the general framework (tracking cookies)? And would that consent depend on the overlay not including any surprising terms (e.g. "you're also buying a washing machine", "you're also allowing us to mine crypto in your browser" or "we may also use browser finger printing, not just cookies")?

Re: I don't care about cookies

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR is sooo easy to follow as a startup. Just gather the data you need and not everything else,and ask for consent. If anything, it was the big players getting work to do. Thousands of people on mailing lists with no control of how they got there. Asked and kept insane amounts of not necessary data. Data floating in hundreds of database tables spread over various services and third party vendors and data centers wit…

It really isn't that easy. Something like an IP address is considered personally identifiable information, and most web servers and frameworks log that by default. If you really want to comply it takes quite a bit of effort you are not accidentally logging IP addresses somewhere. You can argue you need that info for the operation of your site, but it's been established that you would still need to ask permission in t…

You can argue you need that info for the operation of your site, but it's been established that you would still need to ask permission in that case, did you do that?

Where and how was that established? There are obvious operational and security reasons why the operator of a website might reasonably log access information, and there are lawful bases for processing data under the GDPR other than having the subject's explicit consent.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law forced the companies to be explicit about what they do, and ask for consent. The user experience is made shit by the companies doing shady things. If they didn't do shady shit, they wouldn't have to display any banner. I'd rather be informed, at least I can make a decision that way. Why shoot the messenger? The part that is missing is making rejecting as easy as accepting. So far there are a lot of dark patte…

How is something like having Google Analytics on your site "shady shit"? I would think counting unique visitors is a legitimate business interest for most businesses. And there is no way to do that without a cookie, or without storing IP address (which is considered personally identifiable info). The law could have been much better if it simply asked browser makers to provide a single place to configure your preferen…

> How is something like having Google Analytics on your site "shady shit"?

The fact that a question can be phrased like this really illuminates how much society has changed in 20 years.

Not so long ago sharing data between sites was definitively shady. Then Google somehow institutionalized it, and now it is completely mainstream.

> I would think counting unique visitors is a legitimate business interest

Yes, that's not it. Identifying people are, and collecting their personal data is.

Re: I don't care about cookies

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is not a good thing. GDPR is a highly complex piece of legislation that is very hard to navigate and therefore only established companies with big bucks to spend on lawyers and extra engineering can profit from the ecosystem while everybody else is put at risk. Complex legislation and regulations is the best way to keep monopolies in place. Same goes for the financial sector, telecoms, etc. It's nearly impossi…

GDPR is sooo easy to follow as a startup. Just gather the data you need and not everything else,and ask for consent. If anything, it was the big players getting work to do. Thousands of people on mailing lists with no control of how they got there. Asked and kept insane amounts of not necessary data. Data floating in hundreds of database tables spread over various services and third party vendors and data centers wit…

GDPR is sooo easy to follow as a startup. Just gather the data you need and not everything else,and ask for consent.

Clearly we're not going to ask for consent to track someone who is systematically probing our site for vulnerabilities, or someone who is attempting to use us to validate presumably stolen credit card details, or a group who are obviously sharing a password to gain unauthorised access in violation of our terms of service.

Also, the purpose(s) of data processing matter, not just the data itself. It's not as simple as only gathering what you need. You also have to ensure that what you gather is used appropriately, and that you have the means to respond to the various rights that subjects have by law.

Thousands of people on mailing lists with no control of how they got there.

Actually, that was one of the tricky areas when the GDPR came in, and something almost no-one got right despite good intentions. Specifically, the widely accepted best practice for managing a mailing list had long been to use double opt-in, thus verifying that the subscriber really did intend to receive the messages, and to provide a simple, automated unsubscribe facility. However, unless you had kept all the confirmation replies, under the GDPR you might not have met the required standard for evidence of each list subscriber actively opting in to receive your mails.

That led to a wave of messages being sent out to mailing lists asking subscribers to confirm they still wanted to receive the mails. This was particularly ironic because if those subscribers hadn't already intended to consent then those messages were probably themselves in violation of existing law in much of the EU even before the GDPR came in. The difference was that before, no-one was seriously worried that a legitimately operated mailing list with double opt-in was going to be targetted for business-crippling penalties, but with all the ambiguity around the GDPR and the uncertainty around how it was going to be enforced, a lot of people panicked.

Post reply on HN