Slashdot Mirror

Of course I read your post, please don't be condescending and spare me the piecemeal quoting. Not everything in my post was supposed to be a refutation of yours.

Suggesting we protect privacy through politics just sounds ridiculous to me. It was never even clear what was defined as tracking by DNT. DNT wasn't less intrusive, it was empty and symbolic. So, here's my question: why did we need an empty, symbolic regulation to show that ad companies are tracking people?

Back to your original point though, the ad industry seemed to be ready to support DNT until MS made the default setting on, which clearly wasn't a user's "wishes". This wasn't a display of the advertising industry's unwillingness to regulate themselves, it was their unwillingness to let MS dictate terms to them.

Additionally, the NAI has long had an opt out system: http://www.networkadvertising.... (long before DNT). Saying they failed to self-regulate strikes me a misinformed at best.

Also, you might want to consider your own knowledge level on a subject before accusing others of not understanding, it might improve "your persuasion skills".

Please! If people won't take a clue and use a HOSTS file they deserve all the ads they get.

The system the author uses is a cookie type, so the must keep their cookies, someone posted
that there are Firefox programs to keep certain cookies after I posted this before. I just scanned
the article but seems like http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/

Just use a HOSTS file mines 144292 lines, I don't get many ads.

And know that you can't opt-out of on-line or mobile ads - Google tossed me a loop searching for a PDF,
I put in TRAX it searches for TRACKS; - I say that then say you need to opt out of Flurry.com at the router level.

I've also found an easy way to "block" Web Beacons; in your browser set it to download "GIF" files,
I download them to C:\temp. I then goto NewEgg.com search around a bit then check C:\temp and there
are a couple 1K gif files (web beacons). but doesn't affect any normal gif files say avatars.

http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/#completed give you the ablity to opt out of data collection but there's a catch,
you have to keep your cookies.

This site has changed since I last visited (years?), it used to have a large list of companies you could select to opt out from.
Now it just reads your cookies, 33 companies are listed that "honor" your opt-outs.

I use a rather large HOSTS file and delete my cookies when my browser closes, so this site does me little good.
my results: "These 0 member companies have enabled Online Behavioral Ads for this web browser."

Posted in case someone else can make use of it.

I am from the industry and think the IAB's stand is poppycock. I firmly believe and have done ever since I learned a lot about targeting using cookies etc that the choice should be with the end users. It is totally unfair that the options exist currently, but only for the most savvy users. This current hullabalo shows that all the current initiatives such as the NAI http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/ are all spin. Also, there already exists methods whereby companies store cookies for individuals on the cloud where the end user has no control. I think the online ad industry already 10+ years old has become like the MPAA or RIAA (always wondered: *why* does an organisation even exist that has the name records in it). The focus of the innovation has to be how to deliver targeted content WITH user consent. Not add more layers and tracking beacons and then selling it all to the NSA.

If you want to see Ghostery at work, try that link to the first opt-out site http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/ with Ghostery running - the list of blocks scrolled right off the bottom of my page.

Huh, only got one - Twitter Button widget. It's telling me that I need to allow "both first and third party" cookies.

If you want to see Ghostery at work, try that link to the first opt-out site http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/ with Ghostery running - the list of blocks scrolled right off the bottom of my page.

NAI (Network Advertising Initiative)
Tracking opt out of 99 of some of the largest ad networks, including Google and MS (but guess who isn't there?)
http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/

Sure - the first thing this NAI website does is set a cookie, then it won't work (whatever it does) without javascript enabled. What's wrong with this picture?

Interesting, but I am pretty sure DNT was Mozilla's Idea. And frankly, it always seemed like a waste of time. Given all the ways that one can be tracked though, a technical solution seems difficult as well.

- Cookies
- JavaScript
- tracking pixels
- HTML local DBs
- Flash objects
- fonts
- screen size/colors
- plugin config/versions
- User agent
- IP address
- and now.... "DNT" toggle...

It almost seems as the only way to keep from being tracked is via the TOR browser incognito mode in a freshly wiped VM or something. I honestly wonder if the 'net need to move more towards mesh/tor/ad-hoc networking. Basically if the "darknet" should be the "mainnet".

Anyways, some info:

EFF tool to see how well you can be tracked (fingerprinted)
https://panopticlick.eff.org/index.php?action=log

NAI (Network Advertising Initiative)
Tracking opt out of 99 of some of the largest ad networks, including Google and MS (but guess who isn't there?)
http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/

Apple iAd opt out
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4228

Similarly, you can use the NAI's opt-out page to opt-out of Google and other ad network tracking.

I went to that page - it told me I had to turn on third-party cookies to use its functionality. Nice try!

I'm pretty sure not allowing third-party cookies largely solves the problem already. I've also got Firefox set to "ask me every time" whenever someone wants to set a cookie - yeah, it was a pain for the first few weeks, but I think it's worth it.

So what happens if a company proxies the third-party cookies through their own site and turns them into first-party cookies?

Advertisers can develop just as many hacks to deliver as as people can create hacks to stop advertisers.

What, you thought HTML5 was just for kicks?

Similarly, you can use the NAI's opt-out page to opt-out of Google and other ad network tracking.

I went to that page - it told me I had to turn on third-party cookies to use its functionality. Nice try!

I'm pretty sure not allowing third-party cookies largely solves the problem already. I've also got Firefox set to "ask me every time" whenever someone wants to set a cookie - yeah, it was a pain for the first few weeks, but I think it's worth it.

It's already starting to bother me. I'm seeing these advertisements here on Slashdot too. After I've searched for something on Google, the related advertisements start to come up EVERYWHERE on the internet. Seriously, they come after you. If you search for specific flights you start to see ads for that everyone. It'll haunt you and there's nothing you can do.

Not true: you can change your Google Ad Preferences or opt-out.

Similarly, you can use the NAI's opt-out page to opt-out of Google and other ad network tracking.

There's plenty of browser plugins that work to block ads entirely (such as AdBlock) and ones that ensure that the "opt-out" cookies stay in existence even if you clear your other cookies.

All the other browsers than Safari and IE are in bed with advertisers because both Firefox and Opera get revenue directly from Google.

The default search box in those browsers comes configured to use Google, yes. They do get income from ad revenue stemming from searches from the box. You're not forced to use that search box, nor are you forced to use the default settings -- you can add other search providers (like DuckDuckGo, ixquick, etc.) -- Firefox, for one, doesn't have ad agreements with anyone other than Google.

So for the love of god Apache Project, stop taking bribes from Google and doing evil things like this!

Is there evidence that the Apache project is "taking bribes from Google"?

My understanding from the article is that an individual contributed a patch to the the Apache httpd.conf source code and does not reflect the official viewpoint of the Apache Foundation, nor that the patch has been approved for inclusion. Naturally, I welcome any corrections.

You should take a look at NAI. It covers alot of this:
http://www.networkadvertising.org/
There is actually alot of transparency, but many/most people don't actually take the time to look at the information and opt-out options.

I work in this field, and people are acutely aware of the privacy issues, for both ethical and pragmatic reasons. Pragmatically, as pointed out in the infamous article about Target stores sending advertisements to women 3-6 months pregnant, people find it creepy when they're clearly being targeted. Hence, it reduces effectiveness.
Ethically, well, that varies. Many people in the industry have a merchant oriented perspective (they are trying to help the merchants find interested customers, which is not an evil motive). Many also view what advertising as heading towards a more concierge type service (i.e. ads that highlight the interests the customer has been looking for, rather than pushing an irrelevant sale). And there are also people who don't care one way or the other about the ethics, and we have privacy laws that help there.

The site that allows you to get opt out cookies for over a hundred of behavior targeting advertising networks has been around for many years, and was actually created by those networks - www.networkadvertising.org.

Opt out now and don't forget to visit this site every time you re-install OS or clear cookies.

It works like a charm, you don't need a separate plugin for every network you aware of... there are hundreds of the ones you never even heard of yet seeing their custom tailored ads every day.

You can easily opt out from behavioral advertising of google ads and 100+ other add networks by simply going to http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp . This site is a tool provided by those advertisers, its just not too many ppl know about it.

It's really not that hard. First hit on googling "opt out ads" is http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp

Here's what you agreed with when you used /.

http://geek.net/privacy-statement
http://geek.net/index.php/terms-of-use/

"Web beacons

Geeknet uses web beacons from time to time. Such web beacons may be provided by Geeknet’s third party advertising companies to help manage and optimize Geeknet’s online advertising. To opt out of targeted advertising delivered by Network Advertising Initiative members, click here: http://www.networkadvertising.org/consumer/opt_out.asp ... "

Personally, I do not like the idea of .gov sites using addthis.com to add/manage content to their site. There are plenty of scenarios where this can be abused by third party sites (see addthis.com "partners" page).

FCC.gov's privacy page does not clearly mention this, nor does it provide links to opt-out from advertising networks (yes, I know, another cookie to opt you out, but something is better than nothing: http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp
(yes, I submitted this information to them as well)

It is a noble effort to modernize things. I just hope they approach this with caution.

Maybe it's my internet marketing background, but when I read about a 12% conversion rate of interested people reaching a page, I don't think "hey, these people don't want to opt out," I think "hey, this website has some serious usability issues."

Here's what I experienced: Found the opt out page, hit select all, and clicked submit to opt out. I was taken a page with ~50 little messages saying "You have successfully opted out from this network." It wasn't until I scrolled down to the very bottom (passed all these messages) that I found the notification: "Please click continue below to confirm the results of your opt out requests."

Despite clicking "submit" and getting what looked like 50 success messages, nothing was actually saved until I clicked an innocuous link on the next page! One gets the impression they're not trying very hard.

Opt out of major advertising networks: http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp Opt out of doubleclick/google ads: http://optout.doubleclick.net/cgi-bin/optoutgoogle.pl

In this case I dont think it's that nefarious. I think it's easily many layers of middle managers trying to do a bit better than the last guy tossing on one more layer of tracking until you get a hairball of cookies, HTML5 DBs, Flash LSOs, etc. Most do not seem particularly intrusive alone, but added together the big picture is kinda creepy.

Still the WSJ article makes it sound like 50 mom and pop web sites using Google Analytics. They don't seem to differentiate that two cookies does not equal twice the tracking. One cookie is all you need to track many metrics.

The stuff I find really unnerving is the social network mining and analysis. The economist had a great story on it: http://www.economist.com/node/16910031?story_id=16910031

Now this isn't just cookies on facebook, but actually recoding how long people talk on the phone to identify them as "influencers".

Between things like Radian6, Experian/Equifax/TansUnion, and RingLeaderDigital, there is some very shady tracking going on. And some of the companies are most definitely trying to tie in personally identifiable information. Certainly, the credit unions are committed to keeping just about every fact they can about you. They mine publicly available court records, work with your credit card companies, and they would love to know your browsing history. Their whole purpose it to create as complete a profile of you as possible. They say they delete the info in 10 years but I think some have been caught being less than diligent.

Anyways, for SOME of the more reputable* ad companies you can opt-out here: http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp.

*Relative term

I am confused about the FTC requiring opt-out tools. They already exist. You can go to the Network Advertising Initiative's website and opt-out. Sure, only members of this organization will recognize the opt-out cookie but most advertising and tracking services are members of the NAI. Then there are tools as OP mentioned. I'd like to add Bynamite as well.

It's not always that transparent. If you consider the network advertising initiative for example, you can quickly see a large number of advertising networks that track behavioral patterns based simply on embedded advertisements on pages that don't necessarily carry any obvious information about what types of behavioral tracking the user is being subjected to. Furthermore, you can't easily tell if a site employs these features before actually going to it. Sure, you can opt-out but that just sets a cookie. Clear your cookies, and you're opted back in.

I'm guessing that Topica is spearheading this. They've been trying to whitelist themselves for months. They just had a falling out with Habeas. They're hosting the mailing list for ESPC.

here is a central website that allows you to opt out of the big advertising networks. Network Advertising Initiative

...that's full agreement with all points above. For Linux users, deploying Junkbuster is as easy as downloading the RPM or DEB file and installing it. For Windows users, either NT or Win9x, you can also use the proxy.

Both the banner and cookie action are way cool. The following blockfile eliminates pretty darned near all the banner ads (and the sites associated with them if a full site or domain is listed). Note that I've allowed banners at a number of Linux-friendly sites, on principle, though you could change this if you wanted.

/*.*/ad/
/*.*/ads/
/*.*/advert/
/*.*/adverts/
a32.g.a.yimg.com/
ad.*.*
adforce.imgis.com/
adremote.*.*
ads*.*.*
doubleclick.net
image.pathfinder.com/sponsors*
preferences.com
sfgate.com/place-ads

Those few lines block virtually all the ad traffic I see.

For cookies, I block all, then selectively allow a limited number of sites with which I do business. Mostly message boards.

There was a really good program Online Profiling on NPR's Talk of the Nation a couple of months back. Other useful resources are Center for Democracy and Technology, and for a look at the other side, NetworkAdvertising.Org and Direct Marketing Association

If setting up a proxy is too much for you, the following tricks will prevent a permanent cookie file from being generated:

• Linux, Netscape: ln -sf /dev/null ~/.netscape/cookies
• Windows, Netscape: set read-only permissions to your cookies file, or replace it with a directory.

I'm not sure what the corresponding IE trix are. For Linux, lynx and other browsers can use the link to /dev/null trick.

What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?