Re: June Draft - Proposal for User Agent Compliance

This reminds me of this story from way, way back: 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/07/help_my_belkin_router/.

I know we've discussed intermediaries, like routers or firewalls or 
media players, altering the DNT signal. I don't recall what discussion 
we've had, if any, about intermediaries that might engage in tracking. 
And if they did track, how would they receive the DNT signal and then 
send back the tracking status?


On 6/27/13 5:44 PM, Dobbs, Brooks wrote:
> Alan,
>
> This is actually an important point.  We have been operating under an 
> assumption that tracking could only occur by a "website", but really 
> tracking could just as easily (perhaps even more easily) occur through 
> a user agent.  It may be the case that this is not in fact widely 
> occurring today, but it would seem very prudent to allow for this 
> possibility particularly considering the potential sea change DNT is 
> envisioned to have.
>
> -Brooks
>
>
> -- 
>
> *Brooks Dobbs, CIPP *| Chief Privacy Officer |*KBM Group* | Part of 
> the Wunderman Network
> (Tel) 678 580 2683 | (Mob) 678 492 1662 | *kbmg.com*
> _brooks.dobbs@kbmg.com
>
>
> _
> This email – including attachments – may contain confidential 
> information. If you are not the intended recipient,
>  do not copy, distribute or act on it. Instead, notify the sender 
> immediately and delete the message.
>
> From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com 
> <mailto:achapell@chapellassociates.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:36 PM
> To: Alex Fowler <afowler@mozilla.com <mailto:afowler@mozilla.com>>, 
> "public-tracking@w3.org <mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>" 
> <public-tracking@w3.org <mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>>
> Subject: Re: June Draft - Proposal for User Agent Compliance
> Resent-From: <public-tracking@w3.org <mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:36 PM
>
> Sure.. In reviewing the June draft with colleagues, it occurred to me 
> that some User Agents – technically speaking – could engage in 
> tracking. My sense is that it is implicit that User agents would fall 
> under the definition of third party under this spec and therefore 
> would be subject to certain requirements. My goal was to make that 
> more explicit. It may not be a big deal as both the DAA Code and the 
> FTC consent order in the Sears case are generally in line with my 
> proposed language.
>
> I'm open to wording suggestions, or a debate on the merits.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alan
>
> From: Alex Fowler <afowler@mozilla.com <mailto:afowler@mozilla.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:26 PM
> To: <public-tracking@w3.org <mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>>
> Subject: Re: June Draft - Proposal for User Agent Compliance
> Resent-From: <public-tracking@w3.org <mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:26:49 +0000
>
>     Alan -
>
>     I'm not sure I understand the intent of this proposed addition,
>     Alan. Can you provide further info on what this means? My
>     apologies if this is connected to a previous discussion that I missed.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Alex
>
>
>     On 6/26/13 8:49 AM, Alan Chapell wrote:
>>     I propose adding the following:
>>
>>     A user agent MUST NOT track information related to the network
>>     interaction outside of the [Permitted Uses] and any
>>     explicitly-granted exceptions without consent.
>>
>>     Alan
>