Hi 2015-10-19 15:35 GMT+01:00 Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com>: > I am fine with publishing it. > If it allows further work, then this is a good idea. > > Re: first NOTE in the document, i.e., identification and correlation, > generally speaking, I have an impression that identification is an > inter-temporal correlation within a site, and "correlation" is the case > where cross-site/domain correlation is possible in addition. At least, > that's how I explain the pseudonymity and verinymity. > I think it's just a matter of wording. Actually it could be simplified by replacing: "an online party can correlate multiple visits" with "an online party can link separate visits". Makes the matter clearer in my opinion. Additionally, "Browser fingerprinting provides privacy concerns even" I would replace "provides" with "brings" - again, just a matter of wording, although in the previous case it makes it much more clearer IMO. Additionally it might be extended a bit, for example why not including a discussion of other sources of identifiers, that can possibly change with time (even in short intervals). For some reason I also have an odd feeling sometimes "fingerprint(ing)" could be replaced with identification/identifiers. For example: "cookie-like fingerprinting". When we speak about setting and reading - is it still fingerprinting? But if it is, then it is definitely active (because: setting"), so why not in this case merge it with 3.2. Please pardon me for my academic blurb ;) Best Lukasz
Received on Monday, 19 October 2015 20:38:06 UTC