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

RE: tracking-ISSUE-219 (Context separation): 3rd parties that are 1st parties must not use data across these contexts [Compliance Current]

From: Shane M Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 22:14:13 +0000
To: "Mike O'Neill" <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>, "'David Wainberg'" <dwainberg@appnexus.com>
CC: "'Walter van Holst'" <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "'Rob Sherman'" <robsherman@fb.com>
Message-ID: <DCCF036E573F0142BD90964789F720E31419D5F7@GQ1-MB01-02.y.corp.yahoo.com>
Mike,

Where do you get the ">20% downloading ad & cookie blockers" metric?  

- Shane 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike O'Neill [mailto:michael.oneill@baycloud.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 3:45 AM
To: 'David Wainberg'
Cc: 'Walter van Holst'; public-tracking@w3.org; 'Rob Sherman'
Subject: RE: tracking-ISSUE-219 (Context separation): 3rd parties that are 1st parties must not use data across these contexts [Compliance Current]

David,

IMO people have already decided what Do Not Track means (the clue is in the name), and with >20% downloading ad & cookie blockers, regularly purging cookies etc. a significant proportion are already expressing that preference. A far better option is to respect this with a clear commitment not to retain tracking data (unique ids, fingerprints etc.) , and building trust through the UGE mechanism (consent).

The added value created by individual personalisation (beyond what you could get with low entropy cookies), could be part of the conversation to justify tracking. Isn't that what the deal is supposed be anyway?

Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: David Wainberg [mailto:dwainberg@appnexus.com] 
Sent: 03 October 2013 20:16
To: Mike O'Neill
Cc: 'Walter van Holst'; public-tracking@w3.org; Rob Sherman
Subject: Re: tracking-ISSUE-219 (Context separation): 3rd parties that are 1st parties must not use data across these contexts [Compliance Current]

Mike,

On 2013-10-03 7:20 AM, Mike O'Neill wrote:
> If a user sees personalisation when they have explicitly requested not to be tracked they will assume their wishes are being ignored, and this will damage the credibility of Do Not Track.
I disagree. I realize it will be a challenge to get right, but since users will be educated about what DNT does or does not do before they make the choice to turn it on, they'll understand that any post-DNT:1 personalization they're seeing is being done in accordance with the DNT rules, and so with limited data retention. In fact, users could come to understand it as a great benefit: they get the personalization, but without their browsing history being accumulated and retained.

Best,

-David




Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 22:19:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:19 UTC