500 websites put on notice about their use of cookie banners

[JorgeV]

Hello,

A privacy group has lodged hundreds of complaints against what it calls "cookie banner terror" online.
[bbc.com...]

Of the 500 pages in its first batch of complaints, 81% had no "reject" option on the first page, but rather hidden in a sub-page, it said. Another 73% used "deceptive colours and contrasts" to lead users into clicking "accept", and 90% provided no easy way to withdraw consent

Noyb says it is first issuing draft complaints to 10,000 of the most-visited websites across Europe, along with instructions on how to change settings.

But it says that if firms do not comply within a month, it will file full formal complaints with enforcement authorities.

[NickMNS]

Cookie Banners are the biggest waste of time on the internet. I'm glad to see that people have taken it upon the themselves to further waste more time. I guess taxes aren't high enough in the EU.

[lammert]

Correction: "Cookie Laws" are the biggest waste of time on the internet. The banners are just a symptom of a much larger problem, i.e. lawmakers not understanding the underlying structure of the internet.

Without cookies no state preservation, and no persistent login or shopping carts anymore. The laws should focus on the abuse of cookies and other tracking methods, rather than on the implementation.

[JorgeV]

Without cookies no state preservation, and no persistent login or shopping carts anymore.

This is why, the cookies you are mentioning do not require to collect the consent of the user.

[lammert]

There is a very thin line between allowed and not allowed cookies. Strictly spoken according to the GDPR, cookies for shopping carts need consent when they stay on the computer when the browser closes. Shopping cart retention between browser sessions is not a necessary functionality for an eCommerce site functionality.

The same for login cookies which are not erased when the browser closes.

Every cookie which is persistent between browser sessions is stored for convenience, not for the basic functionality of the site.

[iamlost]

The entire WWW is a relatively tiny method/system with a series of truly Rube Goldberg-esque contraptions bolted on. Rather like looking back from Windows 10 to MS-DOS 1. How to grow amorphous technical debt :)

Certain behaviour became sufficiently egregious for a jurisdiction to say ‘enough’ and in defence build on yet another kludge.

Yes, it would so much neater if all the world’s jurisdictions could get together and... ya no.

It has been interesting watching the various end runs around third party cookies and data collection constraints.
Trivia Note: Lou Montulli invented both the HTTP cookie and the blink element. Ah, the days when I thought blink the ultimate of page cool :)

It is sad that, so often, egregious is necessary threshold to change. And the initial reaction solution a reciprocal pita.

An interesting, if too often depressing, experiment is to click on a site and note when eg before/after cookie authorisation a cookie is set, if there is actually a difference in cookie set between authorisation settings granted... Forget the various dark patterns, the real question is what is happening under the hood.

Currently, web cookies specifically and user privacy concerns generally are in flux, are a true webdev pita, but the games, ah yes the games, and their attendant self-centred self-righteous sanctimonious marketing hype is an entertaining backdrop to webdevs scratching their heads and complaining into their beer or caffeinated beverage of choice.