W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > March 2013

Re: TPE Handling Out-of-Band Consent (including ISSUE-152)

From: Justin Brookman <justin@cdt.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:33:38 -0400
Message-ID: <51474FF2.7080103@cdt.org>
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Can you propose an alternative? Real-time indication of consent has 
always been a /sine qua non/ of the out-of-band consent framework.  A 
user (or user agent on her behalf) needs some sort of actionable 
information about which companies claim permission to track; otherwise, 
there isn't any accountability for companies or control for users around 
alleged OOB permissions.  What are you proposing instead?  Solely 
server-side management of permissions with no visibility to the user is 
going to be a tough sell, but perhaps there is another option.

Justin Brookman
Director, Consumer Privacy
Center for Democracy & Technology
tel 202.407.8812
justin@cdt.org
http://www.cdt.org
@JustinBrookman
@CenDemTech

On 3/18/2013 1:16 PM, Ronan Heffernan wrote:
> Matthias,
>
> We discussed real-time feedback of out-of-band consent, and that is 
> not going to work in many applications.  To move the determination of 
> OOBC into the real-time interaction with the User Agents would take a 
> prohibitive amount of time with large panels and widely-distributed 
> server infrastructure.  In some cases that relevant information has 
> not even been collected from panel members to make the determination 
> until some hours after the interaction.
>
> --ronan
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Schunter (Intel 
> Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org <mailto:mts-std@schunter.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Team,
>
>
>     my summary of our discussion at the face2face on "Out of Band
>     Consent".
>
>     Loosely speaking, out of band consent is
>     - a state where a site believes that it has sufficient permissions
>     that allow
>       it to track a user even if a user has sent a DNT;1 preference
>     - this belief is caused by mechanisms that are not part of this spec
>       (e.g., obtaining a preference via the exception API is not
>     considered out of band).
>
>     The current TPE spec handles out of band consent as follows:
>     - The spec does not say how a site may or may not obtain out of
>     band consent
>     - The spec requires that a site who wants to act on out of band
>     consent
>       sends a signal "C" that is defined in the TPE spec as follows:
>     *"Consent*: The designated resource believes it has received prior
>     consent for tracking this user, user agent, or
>        device, perhaps via some mechanism not defined by this
>     specification, and that prior consent overrides the tracking
>     preference expressed by this protocol."
>     - The spec allows a site to publish an URL "control" via its
>     well-known resource where a user is permitted to manage consent.
>     - The user agents are free to use this information ("C" signal and
>     URL) as they deem most appropriate for their user group.
>       We do not mandate specific UA behavior.
>
>     My impression from our discussion in the room was that everyone is
>     OK with this approach.
>     I will re-confirm this using an "OK to close" email in order to
>     move us towards closing ISSUE-152.
>
>     Feel free to provide feedback or corrections in case I overlooked
>     anything.
>
>
>     Regards,
>     matthias
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 17:34:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:07 UTC