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

Re: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal

From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:57:33 -0500
To: Justin Brookman <justin@cdt.org>, <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CCC90819.25A37%achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Hi Justin - The issue with your argument below is that it suffers from the
same sort of cognitive dissonance that has permeated a good deal of this
group's thinking over the past year.

Many in this group have started with the premise that the privacy
protections that Users receive from DNT are self-evident ­ so they don't
need to be explained or quantified within the context of the actual impact
of this groups work. Hence, a User's "affirmative decision for privacy" is
presumed with little discussion of what that actually means. And as a
result, a wide latitude is given to UA's to describe the DNT functionality
however they see fit.

Conversely, when it comes to the impact of DNT ‹ the "unproven parade of
horribles" to use your verbiage --- these things must be proven to a
metaphysical certainty to have any impact on the group's work. Why is that?
Are you willing to bet your reputation that DNT won't have a negative impact
on consumer content choices?



From:  Justin Brookman <justin@cdt.org>
Date:  Tuesday, November 13, 2012 2:06 PM
To:  <public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent
to turn on a DNT signal
Resent-From:  <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date:  Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:07:11 +0000

>     
>  
> This language is absurdly prescriptive.  I am unaware of any other privacy
> tool offered by a web browser that mandates an explication of the potential
> negative consequences of making an affirmative decision for privacy.  If
> publishers and third parties want to deny users content based on a DNT signal,
> that is their choice, but requiring disclosure about an unproven parade of
> horribles in advance is not something that a technical standards setting body
> should be contemplating.
>  
>  I leave it to others to opine as to whether it is even possible for all user
> agents to monitor all other user agents' configuration of DNT settings and
> confirm those choices with a user, but again it sounds burdensome and
> prescriptive.  Would that confirmation also require disclosure about the
> potential negative consequences of choosing to turn on DNT?
>  
> Justin Brookman
> Director, Consumer Privacy
> Center for Democracy & Technology
> 1634 I Street NW, Suite 1100
> Washington, DC 20006
> tel 202.407.8812
> fax 202.637.0969
> justin@cdt.orghttp://www.cdt.org
> @CenDemTech
> @JustinBrookman
>  On 11/13/2012 1:35 PM, David Wainberg wrote:
>  
>  
>>   Hi Jeff,
>>  
>>  I don't follow your statement that this would rob users of effective privacy
>> tools. It merely ensures that DNT signals reflect users' deliberate choices,
>> and that users are provided information about the effects of their choices. I
>> don't see why that should be controversial.
>>  
>>  -David
>>  
>>  
>> On 11/13/12 12:31 PM, Jeffrey Chester wrote:
>>  
>>  
>>> This thrust is very problematic and I believe robs users of effective
>>> privacy tools under DNT ("A user agent must not express a tracking
>>> preference for a user."). CDD certainly cannot support such a proposal, and
>>> there needs to be a robust discussion on the negative impact to users from
>>> denying them privacy protection through IE and other browsers.
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>>   
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>>   
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Center for Digital Democracy
>>>  
>>> 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550
>>>  
>>> Washington, DC 20009
>>>  
>>>  
>>> www.democraticmedia.org <http://www.democraticmedia.org>
>>>  
>>> www.digitalads.org <http://www.digitalads.org>
>>>  
>>> 202-986-2220
>>>  
>>>  
>>>   
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Nov 13, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Alan Chapell wrote:
>>>  
>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Thanks Shane. I've proposed some additions (IN BOLD) to your language.
>>>> Thanks to David Wainberg for help drafting, and Walter for providing some
>>>> direction with his comments to the list.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Section  5.  User Agent Compliance
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> A user agent must offer a control to express a tracking preference to third
>>>> parties. The control must communicate the user's preference in accordance
>>>> with the [TRACKING-DNT] recommendation and otherwise comply with that
>>>> recommendation. A user agent must not express a tracking preference for a
>>>> user unless the user has given express and informed consent to indicate a
>>>> tracking preference.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> A UA MUST incorporate detection mechanisms for alteration of
>>>> DNT-preferences by third-party software (including third-party
>>>> UA-extensions and plugins) and MUST upon detection of such changes verify
>>>> with the user that they reflect the user's intentions. The UA MAY provide
>>>> the user with the option to ignore future changes in the DNT-preferences or
>>>> to automatically change them back to a user-set preference.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> "The User Agent MUST make available explanatory text to provide more
>>>> detailed information about DNT functionality within easy and direct access
>>>> for the particular environment prior to DNT being enabled. The explanatory
>>>> text MUST include information  pertaining to the effects  of DNT, including
>>>> that the  User's choice to enact DNT might  interfere with the operation of
>>>> certain content and services and might limit free content that may be
>>>> available to the User."
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Alan
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>> From:  Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
>>>>  Date:  Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:19 AM
>>>>  To:  "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
>>>>  Subject:  ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to
>>>> turn on a DNT signal
>>>>  Resent-From:  <public-tracking@w3.org>
>>>>  Resent-Date:  Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:20:06 +0000
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>     
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> [Proposed, New Text in Quotes ³ ³]
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> Section 5.  User Agent Compliance
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> A user agent must offer a control to express a tracking preference to
>>>>> third parties. The control must communicate the user's preference in
>>>>> accordance with the [TRACKING-DNT] recommendation and otherwise comply
>>>>> with that recommendation. A user agent must not express a tracking
>>>>> preference for a user unless the user has given express and informed
>>>>> consent to indicate a tracking preference.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> ³The User Agent MUST make available explanatory text to provide more
>>>>> detailed information about DNT functionality within easy and direct access
>>>>> for the particular environment prior to DNT being enabled.²
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>  
>>  
>  
>  
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 13:58:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:38 UTC