W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > November 2012

RE: Proposals for Compliance issue clean up

From: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 17:51:18 +0200
To: <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <dd19916007430848235e0a57270d9c15@xs4all.nl>
On 2012-11-10 17:40, Mike O'Neill wrote:
> My opinion is that there should be no difference in the compliance
> spec between 1st and 3rd parties, the DNT:1 signal should mean UUIDs
> must not be allocated or used without consent, and we should put more
> effort in designing an effective and transparent exception protocol.
> As has been pointed out many times this distinction cannot apply in
> Europe anyway. The reason most of us are here is to respond to
> people’s unease about privacy and loss of trust in the web, and we
> should primarily address that.

May I also add that the technical reality is also that the UA 
intereacts through HTTP with both 1st and 3rd parties as if they are all 
1st parties. So both at the technical level as within the European legal 
context, this distinction is not particularly helpful.

Not all is lost though, I think the discussions about Same-Party as a 
result of the 1st and 3rd party distinction have been helpful and the 
mechanism proposed is a good start to ensure accountability.


Received on Saturday, 10 November 2012 15:51:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:00 UTC