W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2012

RE: [Issue-5] [Action-77] Defining Tunnel-Vision 'Do Not (Cross-Site) Track'

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 23:22:27 -0800
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
CC: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D0C8ACC3D@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
Rigo,

There are no real use cases that I'm aware of.  Can someone in the working group please share these if there are any that are documented and verified?

We're here due to the "possibility" of bad actions related to cross-site data collection - basically what is "technically possible" but not yet proven to be "practically real" (philosophical concern vs. real-world harm).

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 1:11 PM
To: Shane Wiley
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Issue-5] [Action-77] Defining Tunnel-Vision 'Do Not (Cross-Site) Track'

On Wednesday 08 February 2012 09:42:56 Shane Wiley wrote:
> Do you have an example in the real-world where a medical or insurance
> website has tracked referrer headers to ask their clientele specific
> questions to affect their coverage?  This appears to be far beyond the
> realm of real-world practices.

I had some of the cases passing by my screen. Whether they fit your concrete 
case? I don't think so. But I'm pretty sure there are some nice cases the 
consumer advocates or the DPAs can bring up. I'm all for being concrete. But 
if we have no case, why are we here anyway? Why are consumers so concerned?

The cases that show the danger for democracy, you admitted in another email, 
are difficult to make public. 

Best, 

Rigo
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 07:23:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:45 UTC