Re: Summary of First Party vs. Third Party Tests

* David Wainberg wrote:
>Just to be clear, I am not advocating for a policy result that's 
>necessarily different. I'm advocating what I think is an easier and more 
>scalable way to get there. We should address directly the real 
>underlying rationale for the 1st vs 3rd party distinction: what a user 
>reasonably thinks they've consented to under various circumstances. For 
>example, a user's intentional visit to a site would, in my view, be 
>sufficient implied consent for tracking on that site (e.g. Amazon).

"Tracking" is not a boolean. A static site that collects only standard
log file data is quite different from a site that goes out of its way to
collect data on screen resolutions, installed plugins, installed fonts,
what a user selects, what they copy to the clipboard, what they enter in
some search input field without submitting anything, whether the user
uses they keyboard or scrollbars or some touch input interface to scroll
and so on and so forth. One reason being that it is much easier to re-
identify returning visitors the more data you retain about preceding vi-
sits. Clearly the easier it is to re-identify, the more "tracking" is
taking place.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Friday, 4 November 2011 00:57:20 UTC