- From: (unknown charset) Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:35:36 +0100
- To: (unknown charset) public-tracking@w3.org
Hi Shane, While I agree that halting all collection should not be our goal, I believe that these discussions are useful. I try to put them into perspective: My perspective in general is: - Our working group is called "Tracking Protection" for a reasons: It aims at addressing user's privacy concerns around tracking. - This includes a concern about behind-the-scenes exchange and correlation of information from different contexts. - I agree that this is hard and that none of our rules will be perfect My perspective on the exceptions is: - The ideal effect of DNT;1 would be 'no tracking whatsoever'. - This would break some mechanisms that are desired or required while needing some amount of tracking. - We now what mechanisms we want to keep (the exceptions) - For those mechanisms, we do not want to give a free ride like "if you want to do [mechanism], then you can continue all tracking as usual" - Instead we want to provide a cost-efficient way to keep these mechanisms while keeping as much privacy as efficiently possible To summarize: 1. We need to decide what exeptions to make (what potential trackings not to break under DNT;1) 2. For those mechanism we need to understand today's best practices 3. For these benchmark best practices, we need to find a way to balance cost of implementing changes with the privacy risk/gain Note that I believe that it is important to understand today's practices: Otherwise, we may make constraints that are expensive to implement while not providing privacy gains. Just my 2c, matthias On 2/8/2012 10:08 PM, Shane Wiley wrote: > this all started with OBA but we've clearly continued to down the slippery slope to halt all data collection
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 21:36:19 UTC