marichards
Joined 11 years ago
Karma
216
Submissions
87
Member since
Nov 5
Recent submissions
Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
Not all of the adtech tracking has been removed and if you look around you may still find some.
I wonder what thoughts are regarding Google Analytics on forms like https://www.police.uk/ro/report/rsa/alpha-v1/v1/rape-sexual-...
It sets off the privacy extension I have installed, which could be a little disconcerting
Comment · 6 years ago
IANAL:
If you were allowed to use GDPR under an exemption, perhaps abuse protection, is that the only purpose the data will be used for by yourself and GA?
If you or a data processor you use, uses the data for secondary purposes not covered by any exemption to opt-in consent, I believe you would have to get opt-in consent for those secondary purposes beforehand.
Note: the cookie law is the ePrivacy directive (and national interpretations like PECR) and it goes beyond GDPR in some ways, as the ICO states "Although cookies that process personal data give rise to greater privacy and security risks than those that process anonymous data, PECR apply to all cookies." ( https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/cookies-a... )
Comment · 6 years ago
I give up with Mozilla, switching to Brave.
Comment · 6 years ago
I would not.
Firefox still invades the privacy of most users. 1. Install Firefox 2. Type privacy in the search bar 3. Google is now tracking you
It embraces dark patterns that invade privacy, whilst criticising other companies for their devices that invade privacy.
Mozilla need to understand how they are part of the problem before I'd start paying for them. As a privacy campaigner, should I pay for a product that invades it by default? It's hard to... I use them because they're the lesser evil.
Comment · 7 years ago
When you ask a resident if they want to be tracked by ad companies as they organise a funeral, they might think twice.
https://www.wokingham.gov.uk/births-deaths-and-marriages/dea...
Comment · 7 years ago
I agree most of these don't appear necessary, have you thought to contact the DPO, wait 28 days and if no suitable response, contact the ICO?
Also, do you have a link to the EU court guidance?
From what I've read before, some functionally necessary and expected cookies don't need consent, but the user may have a right to be informed.
For instance, a login cookie might be fine, but arguably only if you have logged in - if it remains after you've logged out then that's a bit worrying.
Comment · 7 years ago
This isn't just an issue of marketing wanting a Facebook Pixel.
In some cases, councils turned their websites into revenue streams and thus were being paid to include adverts on their site that tracked users, browsing council content.
Comment · 7 years ago
You can have targeted ads and be anonymous to the ad companies.
Ads can be targeted to context, not user - web developer ads on JavaScript blogs.
Ad profiling and targeting can be done client side.
Users' could opt in to what they are targeted for to ensure it is the relevance they want. You will often find ad tracking technology on some very privacy invasive websites. I've seen it on HIV support, rape support, prayer, single parent dating, cancer advice, alcoholism, political party membership pages and many more; even tracking military intelligence recruitment. Are the relevant ads and infosec risks for these topics good for the user?
Tackling anonymised delivery and fraud prevention is a problem, but it's something that can be overcome with accepting it already happens and then minimising it through privacy respective methods like using auditors and testing, copying anonymisation protocols (maybe Tor), payment style validation (Brave?, zerocoin) and server side metrics.
I wanted to explore the extent to which some significant UK websites include SRI of JavaScript assets.
Put together on a Sunday, needs work, curious about how best to check for CSP and whether I've missed other risks beyond just JavaScript not protected by SRI.