We support what Jonathan and Peter have said, and looking forward to the technical discussion on ensuring privacy is meaningfully respected under DNT, inc. frequency capping. I have been away on personal matters, but will also respond generally to the many comments when I review by early next week. Jeff On Jul 11, 2012, at 8:57 PM, Peter Eckersley wrote: We understand that the advertising industry would be very unhappy if explicit non-consent from a consumer prevented frequency capping. From privacy groups' perspective, there cannot be a Do Not Track standard that allows unique IDs for frequency capping of non-consenting users. Fortunately this is not an impasse, because there are many possible technical methods to do f-capping without ID cookies or other strong tracking measures. Such methods are the obvious (and as far as I can see, the only possible) compromise for f-capping. The job of this working group is to write some compromise language that says "you can do f-capping provided it is not achieved by tracking each user or small group of users". And the advertising industry groups can help by bringing a few of their members' key engineers to look at that language and spread the word: "yes, we can do that". On 11 July 2012 15:26, Jonathan Mayer<jmayer@stanford.edu> wrote: I believe Chris Mejia entirely misunderstood my note yesterday, and the thread has since careened into a conversation about the business relationships and economic value associated with frequency capping. While those topics appear to have been educational for some participants—please continue!—that was not at all my aim. I want to have a software engineering discussion about how frequency capping is currently implemented, and how it might be implemented in ways that better protect consumer privacy. The CEO of AppNexus was kind enough to give details of his company's implementation which, as he explained, does not neatly integrate into a privacy-preserving approach. Leonid Litvin from PulsePoint suggested that the algorithm I proposed—which is compatible with a privacy-preserving approach—might work. Let's pick up from there. > Jonathan Jeffrey Chester Center for Digital Democracy 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550 Washington, DC 20009 www.democraticmedia.org www.digitalads.org 202-986-2220
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 11:32:11 UTC