Live data from Hacker News

No Cookie for You

github.blog

341–350 of 634 posts

Re: No Cookie for You

#341
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. Also even if you do track your visitors you can use privacy friendly (and ideally selfhostable) Analytics like Plausible https://plausible.io/ so you won't need the banners either. Just don't include facebook like buttons or any of these widgets

Does anyone happen to know of a service like this that is free (not self hosted) for non-commercial, low-traffic sites? Or which costs less than ~$10 per year. I have a basic Github Pages site, and I currently don't know whether anyone is looking at it, beyond the very few who take the time to email me. I don't need (or want) to know anything about my visitors, but it would be nice to know that I'm not simply tossing…

Make the visitor counter great again!

Re: No Cookie for You

#342
post #9

If they've gotten rid of 3rd party analytics, does this mean they're just using their own? Presumably session cookies count as "required", and could be used to track your actions at least on github.com.

I presume this is indeed what they're doing given the wording of the post:

"(And of course GitHub still does not use any cookies to display ads, or track you across other sites.)"

That exactly leaves out "track you on our own site". But honestly, I have absolutely zero issue with them tracking my behavior on their own site. I know how valuable it is to be able to learn/see what users are doing, and they should absolutely be able to do that.

Re: No Cookie for You

#343

This is fantastic. Thank you, GitHub. I hope this is a good demonstration of a hands-off approach at Microsoft in regard to company culture. I realize you likely still collect some analytics for yourself and that this change does nothing to alleviate that. EG, first party javascript. But it's great that it's divorced from 3rd parties. Presumably Microsoft has access to those metrics, though? I wonder how deeply that…

GitHub still sends the same personal data to their own analytics endpoint, and the privacy policy which lists third-party data subprocessors [1] has not been updated. See my comment below for details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25458635 Tracking cookies have little value for GitHub when they can collect data about users that have already been authenticated, and they send the username and user ID as part of…

What is the real value in a privacy policy? I assumed they were similar to EULAs - totally unenforceable. Are there actually any legal repercussions if they lie in their privacy policy? Or is it just ill will that might be accrued (and probably quickly forgotten) if they are found out to have violated their own privacy policy?

Re: No Cookie for You

#345

Shoutout to the extension "I don't care about cookies" that removes all these banners automatically. [1]: https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/ [2]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-a... [3]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/i-dont-care-about-...

Also, at [1] there's a filter list you can use instead of installing the extension.

Re: No Cookie for You

#346

Shoutout to the extension "I don't care about cookies" that removes all these banners automatically. [1]: https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/ [2]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-a... [3]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/i-dont-care-about-...

That extension hides, and sometimes accepts cookie consent popups for tracking cookies, it's harmful for your privacy, and should only be installed if you literally don't care about cookies, nor your privacy.

Re: No Cookie for You

#347
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never once in my life clicked on any of these banners. In no way have I given them my consent. I simply ignore them. If they track me, they're breaking the law.

the law requries either consent or legitimate interest ( there are even more options - but not relevant here ). So they can track you without consent and not breaking the law.

when it comes to cookies the ePrivacy directive 5.3 is more strict and requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies and similar technology (incl. fingerprinting). Look up the recent case against Apple IDFA. Legitimate interest does not come into play here actually.

on mobile so can’t easily post links unfortunately. EDIT: here’s a couple of links

https://noyb.eu/en/noyb-files-complaints-against-apples-trac...

https://blog.gingerlime.com/2020/does-ios-14-protect-your-pr...

Re: No Cookie for You

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone happen to know of a service like this that is free (not self hosted) for non-commercial, low-traffic sites? Or which costs less than ~$10 per year. I have a basic Github Pages site, and I currently don't know whether anyone is looking at it, beyond the very few who take the time to email me. I don't need (or want) to know anything about my visitors, but it would be nice to know that I'm not simply tossing…

https://www.cloudflare.com/web-analytics/

"We are democratizing web-analytics" wow, really? Well the people have voted and they want no analytics at all. Thank you very much.

Re: No Cookie for You

#349
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. Also even if you do track your visitors you can use privacy friendly (and ideally selfhostable) Analytics like Plausible https://plausible.io/ so you won't need the banners either. Just don't include facebook like buttons or any of these widgets

IANAL, but my understanding is that you might still need a consent box even if you use Plausible. I've only skimmed over the docs, but it looks like they derive a unique identifier from the IP address and user agent which changes every day. IP addresses still count as Personally Identifiable Information under GDPR, so deriving an identifier from this for a use case such as analytics would likely require consent. This…

[deleted]

Re: No Cookie for You

#350
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the law requries either consent or legitimate interest ( there are even more options - but not relevant here ). So they can track you without consent and not breaking the law.

"Legitimate interest" (Article 6.1.f) is one of the weaker clauses for lawfulness of processing as it comes with the following caveats: 1. Having some legitimate interest is not necessarily sufficient - the privacy interests of the data subject can override the legitimate interests of the controller (Article 6.1.f itself), so the controller has to explicitly take the privacy interests of the data subject into account…

Very true! yet lots of companies still (try to) hide behind it. My recent experience was with Sonos. They heavily track you without opt-in/explicit consent and hide behind legitimate interest.

https://blog.gingerlime.com/2020/sonos-is-spying-on-me-and-y...

Post reply on HN