- From: Kevin Smith <kevsmith@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:04:44 -0800
- To: Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>, John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Matthias, Did you intend to attach this to Issue 105? Seems like that issue focuses on responses to requests on which there was no DNT: request, not when the server gets a DNT:1 request header. Seems like this should perhaps be attached to Issue 51 or 81. Sorry if I am missing something obvious. -----Original Message----- From: Matthias Schunter [mailto:mts@zurich.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 10:01 AM To: John Simpson Cc: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: Re: tracking-ISSUE-105: Response header without request header? [Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)] Hi All, I gave this another thought and I now had the impression that SHOULD may be sufficient. A wording like: If a site receives a DNT;1 request header, then it SHOULD send a DNT response header. (header details defined elsewhere) Reasoning: 1. In order to be compliant, a site needs to satisfy the compliance and DNT specs 2. A site that is compliant with above wording honors a DNT=1 request but may not send a corresponding acknowledgement (for whatever reason) The result would be that a site sufficiently protects privacy (according to the compliance spec) while not advertising the fact. This will make users assume the worst (i.e., that DNT=1 was not honored). While this is not optimal, it at least ensures that the site provides more privacy than promised which I believe to be OK from a privacy perspective. A benefit of SHOULD is that sites could improve their data collection/retention/usage first to satisfy the compliance spec and then later do further upgrades to provide transparency/notice. An example would be a site that never stores anything while ignoring DNT. Similar to today's practice that privacy policies usually over-state the potential uses of the collected data. What do you think? Regards, matthias On 12/20/2011 9:58 PM, John Simpson wrote: > Agree that if request header is DNT=1, then a site MUST send a > response header to be compliant. >
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 00:06:07 UTC