Live data from Hacker News

No Cookie for You

github.blog

391–400 of 634 posts

Re: No Cookie for You

#391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

generally they are used to protect against DDOS and to have forensic data in the case there is malicious behavior and are allowed as essential to operating the service.

But then they can read the logs and track you anyway?

Sure. But that would be against the GDPR if you didn't say you were going to use it for that.

Re: No Cookie for You

#392
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but it still seems like this could violate the GDPR, right? They say: >>So, we have removed all non-essential cookies from GitHub, and visiting our website does not send any information to third-party analytics services. But you’re still only allowed to use the cookies for the purpose the user gave you them for , right? So, if: a) the cookies are essential for the user session, and b) you collect the cookies, w…

Are we claiming that if GitHub has a dashboard like “number of concurrent sessions” and “average length of session” and “unique users who touched this feature” it would be a GDPR violation? Because I can’t imagine that they don’t.

It looks like you can still be tracked as long as you are logged into your Github account? (Or even if you are not logged in as long as only Github/Microsoft is tracking you?)

Another question is how exactly can Github be trusted to not send this tracking to Microsoft? It's not like this is something that we can check... I don't think that the EU is going to send inspectors to Microsoft?

Re: No Cookie for You

#393
post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure that they are still tracking you - but Microsoft can easily afford to do tracking in-house...

Doing "tracking in-house" does not exempt you from GDPR requirements. The requirement is exactly the same: explicit and freely given consent is required to collect extra private information not specifically necessary to provide the service requested.

In this case, is github uncompliant now? They say they're not doing third-party tracking but the blog post seems to hint that they're doing their own tracking.

Re: No Cookie for You

#394
post #291

The problem with cookie banners is not their intrusive ubiquity: it's that they keep going against the spirit of the law, which was to make any "non essential" (whatever that means) data collection opt-in. If that were functioning, whereby the two buttons presented to you were a "Continue without cookies" and "I want to opt in", the annoyance would be worth it. But as it stands, most sites just _pretend_ their tracki…

I agree, though I prefer to frame this a little differently. If websites make me click on "I agree" by deliberately making it difficult for me to get through to the actual page without jumping through an extra bunch of hoops, then the act of clicking "I agree" does not constitute freely given consent, and therefore they are collecting personal data illegally.

I don't understand why the regulators are ignoring this. It's destroying the entire principle of the regulation.

Re: No Cookie for You

#395
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but it still seems like this could violate the GDPR, right? They say: >>So, we have removed all non-essential cookies from GitHub, and visiting our website does not send any information to third-party analytics services. But you’re still only allowed to use the cookies for the purpose the user gave you them for , right? So, if: a) the cookies are essential for the user session, and b) you collect the cookies, w…

Pure analytics is exempt of consent from the gdpr point of view from my understanding and from explanations of our local french regulator.

Define "pure" ?

Re: No Cookie for You

#396
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, it only applies in the EU. You don't need to display any banners outside the EU. Not that I am pro-privacy invasion, I'm not, but I'm definitely anti-annoying-popups.

Except that if the sites don't do annoying things there is no need for annoying popups. The EU law: - doesn't require opt-in permission for essential cookies and similar. So basic non-personalized website usage statistics (analytics) do not need a opt-in only if it's tracking people in any way are such opt-ins needed - if you login you are known to have accepted the terms of service and as such after login no opt-in…

[deleted]

Re: No Cookie for You

#397

Teams has so many bugs and crashes, I'm flabbergasted how Microsoft can deliver something like that. Especially given that they have shown that they are capable of delivering a good experience based on the Electron platform with VSCode. My only explanation would be that it was cobbled together by interns, never meant for public release, then some project manager discovered it and said "Ship it!".

This has not been my experience at all. It is quirky, but very usable none the less.

Re: No Cookie for You

#398
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.

The GDPR isn't about "3rd party analytics". It's about collection of personal data as qualified by the purpose of that collection, regardless of who collects it.

Re: No Cookie for You

#400
post #377

I know this will probably get buried, but from what I read and understand you still need to notify your users that you are using essential cookies and provide a list of what cookies are essential, why they are essential and what's the TTL? You do not need consent or button click, but there has to be a notification?

No. That does seem to be a common myth though. I would give you a citation, but I cannot prove a negative.
Post reply on HN