- From: Peter Eckersley <peter.eckersley@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:23:12 -0700
- To: Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 18:23:40 UTC
Issue 60 raises the question of whether a recipient of a DNT: 1 header knows whether it is in fact a first or a third party. This can in some instances be ambiguous: for instance a host of an image may not be able to tell the difference between users who follow a hyperlink to that image (in which case they host is a 1st party) and users who are seeing the image randomly embedded on some other page (in which case the host is arguably a 3rd party) The text that Tom, Jonathan and I drafted resolves this with the following language: A "first party" is any party, in a specific network interaction, that can infer with high probability that the user knowingly and intentionally communicated with it. Otherwise, a party is a third party. A "third party" is any party, in a specific network interaction, that cannot infer with high probability that the user knowingly and intentionally communicated with it. If the authors of other drafts are willing to accept our "high probability" standard for resolving this issue, it can be closed. -- Peter
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 18:23:40 UTC