91–95 of 95 posts
I want to suggest another thing you can do as a web developer. If you can afford it, block all Chrome users, and instruct users to download Firefox instead. Explain why your website is not available for Chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> state actor will be able to know these things rather easily But state actors won't be able identity me individually, so I don't see the harm either. And you can actually reset you FLoC id at any time. I think advertisers (like Facebook) know that this will damage their revenue and doing mass brain wash to make people think this is harmful for everyone (Cambridge Analytica style).
> But state actors won't be able identity me individually, so I don't see the harm either. Why wouldn't they be able to? FLoC tells them you're a dissenter, your IP tells them who you are. Just because you can reset it doesn't mean that you should have to be constantly afraid of your browser working against you. You're just listing ways in which FLoC is slightly less terrible than some maximally terrible hypothetical…
> I would argue the very notion that your recent browsing history affects what you see in the present is a wrong and dangerous one.
It already does, 3p cookies do exactly that and deleting them is a pain because you would also be getting rid of legitimate cookies, so you have very little or no control. Reseting your FLoC id is as easy as pressing a button and you don't have to worry about having to re-login everywhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> state actor will be able to know these things rather easily But state actors won't be able identity me individually, so I don't see the harm either. And you can actually reset you FLoC id at any time. I think advertisers (like Facebook) know that this will damage their revenue and doing mass brain wash to make people think this is harmful for everyone (Cambridge Analytica style).
https://web.dev/floc/ Replace "hiking boots" with "dissent" in this example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But state actors won't be able identity me individually, so I don't see the harm either. Why wouldn't they be able to? FLoC tells them you're a dissenter, your IP tells them who you are. Just because you can reset it doesn't mean that you should have to be constantly afraid of your browser working against you. You're just listing ways in which FLoC is slightly less terrible than some maximally terrible hypothetical…
My browser is already working against me by allowing 3rd party cookies. When FLoC comes along 3p cookies will eventually be disabled by chrome as a long term goal. I see FLoC as less bad than 3p cookies in this case, because I can't tell trackers "hey, please reset all knowledge you have of the tracking of this specific cookie". > I would argue the very notion that your recent browsing history affects what you see in…
So the argument for FLoC is moot because this is actually a false dilemma. We shouldn't be acting as if it is a choice between either third-party cookie or FLoC. Rather, we should reject both.
Aside: In some ways, FLoC is worse than third-party cookies since the latter are not under central control and do not provide a way of automatically grouping an entire browser user population into similarity groups based on past browser history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's more like the case with the Do Not Track header being defaulted to 1 in some browsers and many (most?) sites using that as an excuse to not honor it.
I think it is a good outcome too. If people really want relevant and targeted ads, they will opt-in to no-DNT and yes-FLoC. The fact that people don't, and that websites don't honor DNT, reveal their lies and hypocrisy.
This is the important part regarding "security". Websites choose to not honor "DNT" headers.
Clients can just as easy choose not to honor no-floc headers.
Which is why I'm saying that this is not a security-thing. If people can just choose to ignore your security-headers, they are not a security-feature. At most they are a suggestion that, when followed, make the client honor privacy concerns from servers.