391–400 of 656 posts
Unfortunately, GDPR is an insane web of laws and regulations that any non-lawyer has absolutely no hope of understanding.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16910675
you'all buried the comment as you didn't want to listen but, as I said back then, reality doesn't care about fake internet points.
but hey, you liked gdpr right? it's going to be fun for ambulance chaser around europe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16910301
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The ruling says the website owner illegally shared the user’s IP address with Google. AFAIK, this is an incorrect interpret of events. I wouldn't say so. By making use of the Google Fonts service, the website owner set up a scenario where the browser would then share the user's IP with Google. That's the default behavior of most browser setups. It's as good as sharing with Google directly, no? I feel like the scenar…
This is, for better or for worse, how the internet works. There may be better alternatives, but we're stuck with this for now. The truth is that an extraordinary amount of websites use a third-party resources, jQuery from CDNs, fonts from Google, etc. This ruling will never stand in higher courts imo, because it would break the internet through fear. I'm curious to know whether DNS and your IP being in the the header…
The IP has to be there for the return TCP packet, so under GDPR this falls under "strictly necessary" information.
If someone sniffs you, they now have your PII. They can't do anything with it that is not "strictly necessary" without your consent, otherwise they're also on violation of GDPR.
The only people trying to "break the internet through fear" are the doomsayers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're making the mistake of thinking that the cookie consent requirements are somehow a consequence of GDPR. The cookie consent requirements exist separately from and additionally to GDPR as a consequence of the e-Privacy Directive. What GDPR changed in regard to cookie consent is what exactly constitutes "consent", as it updated the Data Protection Directive in that regard, but it did not change when consent for co…
Also the e-Privacy Directive does exempt strictly necessary cookies from any consent requirements, or am I completely confused now? Edit: No, I'm not. The GDPR page I linked states the situation that follows both from the GDPR and the e-Privacy Directive. It also fits to what is written in the directive itself.
The ruling says the website owner illegally shared the user’s IP address with Google. AFAIK, this is an incorrect interpret of events. The website merely tells the user’s browser that the content is intended to be displayed using a font that, if not installed on the user’s computer, can be downloaded from Google’s server. It is the the user’s browser that initiates a request to Google’s server. A request by the websi…
This isn't "just" initiating a request to a random third party server. Chrome sends a unique ID when accessing (only!) google servers, in the form of X-client-data HTTP header, uniquely identifying the user, and the site he is browsing (via referrer). It's a goldmine. X-client-data: CIS2yQEIprbJAZjBtskBCKmdygEI8J/KAQjLrsoBCL2wygEI97TKAQiVtcoBCO21ygEYq6TKARjWscoB
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Running a website in Germany seems like a god damned nightmare: https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/abmahnung-creative-commons
And they decided to pay? FFS… well, that was certainly educational. It has a very chilling effect on innovation no doubt.
The worst you could do to a lawyer is that maybe you could embarrass them about their lack of network engineering knowledge, but they in turn can extract real money from you through various means.
Also defending oneself results in involving a different lawyer enriching lawyers as a whole anyways.
So what happens if you include e.g. a Wikipedia image or a youtube video? Is that a GDPR violation too? These scenarios also lead to making the users IP available to a third party. If so, how do we avoid breaking the web while keeping privacy needs in balance?
> how do we avoid breaking the web while keeping privacy needs in balance? One thing that I feel would help: Massive decentralization. Self-hosting of content and regular synching of the hosted content on the server sides; or tunneling, think duckduckgo. Self-hosting would make knowledge storage more redundant which protects against (also partial) network blackouts. On the other hand this knowledge is then harder to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's loading fonts. So squarespace needs to host those fonts, fine. But more to the point, it could be argued even the Squarespace CDN is "different" from the actual website, so we need CDN shims that forward local domain requests to the CDNs and return the results. All to hide an IP number for downloading fonts." Moreover, "host it yourself" is easy if you're technically skilled, but very, very difficult if you aren…
Technical skill is kind of a requirement if you want to achieve something that's technical by nature - such as website development or web hosting. And hosting a font file entails dumping it next to your index.html file and adding some very basic CSS. Not exactly difficult.
So an HTTP GET request to another domain (fonts.googleapis.com) "leaked" website visitor's IP address to Google. What the hell? Google Translate: https://rewis-io.translate.goog/urteile/urteil/lhm-20-01-202... > The defendant is sentenced to pay the plaintiff €100.00 > The plaintiff has a claim against the defendant to refrain from passing on the plaintiff's IP addresses to Google under Section 823 (1) in conjunction…
Running a website in Germany seems like a god damned nightmare: https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/abmahnung-creative-commons
The government has the absolute authority to regulate you into a corner, if need be, to protect its people from predation by powerful interests. That's what governments are for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You just need to have a bit of common sense about what's good for your users and what's not good for them. That copyright example by the way, that applies everywhere.
My common sense would say embedding a link to Google Fonts to make use of caching is possible is good for the user
> The browsers don't share third-party caches across domains, because it made it easier to leak information about which sites the user has visited.