pageoneresults
msg:4266831 | 3:31 pm on Feb 14, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Hopefully it performs better than the U.S. Government's Do Not Call Registry.
I'll stick to my tried and true method of not accepting cookies along with clearing any cookies I may allow when exiting the browser.
I have about 10 cookies that are allowed, all the others get nixed if they even make it onto my system. Unfortunately, some sites will throw upwards of 20, 30 cookies at a pop. I quickly use my back button when encountering those situations. I can do without the extra weight. ;) And, they can do without my visit and/or sale. I'll find it elsewhere.
|
bhartzer
msg:4266852 | 4:03 pm on Feb 14, 2011 (gmt 0) |
| Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., introduced a bill Friday |
|
They introduced a bill. It still has a long way until it actually goes into law (or into effect).
|
pawas
msg:4266899 | 5:01 pm on Feb 14, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Will it effect Cookie tracking in Affiliate Marketing ?
|
incrediBILL
msg:4266921 | 5:45 pm on Feb 14, 2011 (gmt 0) |
We don't need no stink'n legislation to dump cookies.
Lot's of FREE software will do it and even AV programs kill tracking cookies.
Shouldn't they be doing something of value like making sure we don't have a financial collapse?
I'm just say'n, waste of my tax payer money on hysterical hype opposed to real world needs.
|
thiefware
msg:4267019 | 9:25 pm on Feb 14, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Yeah, I agree this is a waste of government resources on such a benign problem if you can really call it a problem. People are so paranoid over cookies--I blame it on the anti-spyware companies for making cookies seem dangerous--bunch of hogwash--don't buy into the dangerous cookie thing.
|
jecasc
msg:4267035 | 10:02 pm on Feb 14, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Who needs Cookies nowadays to track visitors. Cookies are out, browser fingerprinting is in.
https://panopticlick.eff.org/
So do we need new legislation about tracking users? Oh, yes we do. More than ever.
|
Sgt_Kickaxe
msg:4267117 | 1:17 am on Feb 15, 2011 (gmt 0) |
So what will this mean for people who earn revenue from affiliate networks like eBay where cookies are used to track winning bids/bidders?
|
graeme_p
msg:4267164 | 4:26 am on Feb 15, 2011 (gmt 0) |
@jesac, it would be trivially simple for browser makers to reduce the amount of identifying information in the UA string. Accept headers are harder, but, as far as I can see, we could get rid of q parameters at least. I doubt many sites use anything other than language and compression.
The information available to Javascript is trickier to deal with.
|
phranque
msg:4267210 | 7:35 am on Feb 15, 2011 (gmt 0) |
| The information available to Javascript is trickier to deal with. |
|
the flash tracking might be worse than the javascript.
the panopticlick site mentioned above tests plugins and fonts.
https://panopticlick.eff.org/resources/fetch_whorls.js
https://panopticlick.eff.org/resources/plugin-detect-0.6.3.js
https://panopticlick.eff.org/resources/deployJava.js
https://panopticlick.eff.org/resources/fonts2.swf
last time i tested, i was unique among all browsers tested so far due to the fonts i have installed.
what confuses me about this is that i have Flashblock installed on this browser...
|
Alcoholico
msg:4267604 | 9:48 pm on Feb 15, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Looks like I'm, going to have to install/uninstall a couple of fonts and change my UA everyday. Flash is sorted thanks to BetterPrivacy Firefox extension.
|
phranque
msg:4267660 | 11:30 pm on Feb 15, 2011 (gmt 0) |
BetterPrivacy takes care of the supercookies.
it does not prevent flash from collecting information and sending it in a request to the server.
|
|
