W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > November 2011

Re: [ACTION-20] First parties signaling exceptions to third parties

From: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 19:10:02 +0100
Message-ID: <4EC007FA.5010007@blaeu.com>
To: public-tracking@w3.org
The whole idea of developing a DNT protocol that will be handled by the 
browser, is that it may superseed the same-origin on which current 
header behavior is based. That is part of the out of the box thinking 
exercise. For requests like a tracking pices, the browser should have 
control over the headers sent to the 3rd party.


On 11-11-2011 2:06, Kevin Smith wrote:
> For requests like a tracking pixel, the 1^st party does not have any 
> control over the headers sent to the 3^rd party.  That request is made 
> by the browser.  It's possible that the 1^st party could somehow 
> signal to the browser that the existing user has opted back in, then 
> the browser could automatically add the override header, but that 
> seems pretty complicated.  However, my guess is that opt in will often 
> be cookie based, and the communication will happen at opt-in time by 
> the 1^st party making a call to the 3^rd party allowing the 3^rd party 
> to set their own cookies and therefore not need any special 
> communication at subsequent requests.
> *From:*Peter Eckersley [mailto:peter.eckersley@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 09, 2011 11:20 AM
> *To:* Tracking Protection Working Group WG
> *Subject:* [ACTION-20] First parties signaling exceptions to third parties
> Some possible language to consider:
> First parties sometimes have active exceptions to DNT.  For instance, 
> a user
> on the New York Times site may have logged in and knowingly opted back 
> in to
> being tracked by third parties while reading the New York Times site.  
> In such a
> case, the first party needs a way to signal to the third parties that, 
> for these
> particular requests, an exception is overriding the DNT: 1 header that the
> user's browser is sending.
> If a first party wishes to signal to a third party that there is an active
> exception to DNT, the first party MUST indicate this with a request 
> parameter
> "dnt-override=" with a non-null value (eg, "dnt-override=1",
> "dnt-override=user logged in", "dnt-override=retain for 1 week", 
> etc).  This
> parameter may be set as a URI query parameter, a URI fragment 
> parameter, or an
> HTTP POST parameter.
> A webserver receiving a request with the "dnt-override=" parameter with a
> value of "1" MAY disregard a DNT: 1 header that it simultaneously
> receives from the client.  However if it does so, it MUST send the 
> Tracking: 1
> response header to the client.
> First parties and third parties MAY agree to additional semantics for 
> values of
> the dnt-override parameter other than 1 or null.  If a third party 
> receives a
> value for "dnt-override" where such an agreement and implementation is 
> not in
> place, it MUST send Tracking: 0 to the client, and ignore the dnt-override
> parameter.
> -- 
> Peter
Received on Sunday, 13 November 2011 18:12:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:42 UTC