- From: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:06:20 +0100
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
On 2014-11-19 01:57, Nicholas Doty wrote: > Separate as to whether this auditing requirement is a good idea for > the recommendation, I'd propose a couple small, friendly amendments to > the language, as per below. > >> For the purposes of this recommendation, auditable is understood as >> having sufficient records of access and use of data retained such that >> an independent auditor would have a reasonable level of confidence >> that the data retained is exclusively used for the permitted uses or >> that breaches of this can be detected ex-post. For example, an auditor >> might use a similar level of confidence to that required for the >> organization's financial records. > > > (Use independent instead of third-party, as the document has a > separate definition for third-party. Use "recommendation". "Example" > rather than "yardstick".) I'm reasonably comfortable with this amendment. For the purpose of the conversation on the necessity of all this, I'd like to point at this document: http://www.iab.net/media/file/Global_meas_guidelines.pdf For audience measurement purposes industry groups are perfectly happy with process audit requirements (see paragraph 4, sub 2) for ad measurement, which reads as: 4. Auditing Guidelines General – Third-party independent auditing is encouraged for all ad-serving applications used in the buying and selling process. This auditing is recommended to include both counting methods and processing/controls as follows: 1. Counting Methods: Independent verification of activity for a defined period. Counting method procedures generally include a basic process review and risk analysis to under- stand the measurement methods, analytical review, transaction authentication, validation of filtration procedures and measurement recalculations. Activity audits can be executed at the campaign level, verifying the activity associated with a specific ad creative being delivered for performance measurement purposes. 2. Processes/Controls: Examination of the internal controls surrounding the ad delivery, recording and measurement process. Process auditing includes examination of the adequacy of site or ad-server applied filtration techniques. Strangely enough, in this group all of a sudden none appears to understand the meaning of auditable in the context of DNT:1 data retained for purposes exempted under this standard? What I am asking for is not substantially different and definitely not more burdensome then what IAB suggests for ad measurement. We're simply talking about an analog to the process/controls audits mentioned above. Regards, Walter
Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2014 15:06:53 UTC