Re: Super Cookies in Privacy Browsing mode

* Rigo Wenning wrote:
>By giving Google a different identity when shopping gifts. This is done using 
>another login/cookie/ID. Ok, they theortically can correlate you via the IP 
>address, but doing so would be clearly abusive. 

It seems reasonable to assume they would do that for fraud detection, to
help users merge and link accounts not meant to be fully separate and so
on.

>If it wouldn't we would have a different discussion. Linking those traces is 
>true money. And the Zeitgeist is to disrespect you even without money. The 
>challenge is to exploit the unknown click-sheep the best one can. As I said, 
>DNT would have been done long ago, had it allowed continued linking that isn't 
>just shown to the user.

I argued back in 2011 that the Tracking Protection Working Group needs
to form some consensus around what they want to accomplish, otherwise it
will not be able to produce anything of value in reasonable time. Well,
Aleecia M. McDonald, who chaired the group at the time, disagreed,

  Bjoern is correct that the charter is very broad. Several people agree
  with the idea that we must figure out why we are here, what we want to
  accomplish, and we should start with principles like what is privacy,
  does privacy matter and if so to whom, and so forth. While I have some
  sympathy for that view, I've pushed not to have those discussions.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
 Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015)  · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 16:10:15 UTC