Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Do Not Call Site Has AT&T Stats Tracker?

Posted by simoniker on from the ring-ring-doh dept.

hookedup writes "The Register is carrying an article about suspicious content at the FTC's Do Not Call site. It has been a runaway hit with US consumers, with over fifty million signing up to avoid spam calls from telemarketers. But the web site hides a little secret: a 1x1 pixel image tracking visitors... and where does the trail lead but to the AT&T, one of the most persistent telemarketers." However, the tipster, James 'Kibo' Parry, notes: "There isn't any evidence proving they _are_ up to anything improper, but this relationship between the FTC and AT&T fails to avoid the potential for impropriety."

7 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. So what? by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slashdot runs MS ads.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  2. ATT has the contract to impliment the DNC by Christopher_G_Lewis · · Score: 5, Informative

    Um...

    AT&T Government Solutions Will Operate Do-Not-Call List

    --
    www.christopherlewis.com
  3. AT&T has the server logs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article says, "The FTC confirmed that AT&T Managed Services is its contractor, and hosts the website."

    They don't need a 1x1 image to track usage... they have the server logs!

  4. Re:Off by a power of ten? by c0dedude · · Score: 5, Funny

    You must be new here. That's only one order of magnatude. Around here, that's pretty good.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
  5. Re:So? by Christopher_G_Lewis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The web bug is to http://g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net

    Aens.net is
    AT&T Enhanced Network Services (AENS6-DOM)
    POB 919014
    San Diego, CA 92191-9014
    US

    Which is basically AT&T Managed Services.

    I'm assuming its a bug to make sure the site is up and running...

    Course I could be wrong, and it is a part of a national conspiracy to make my dinner get cold.

    --
    www.christopherlewis.com
  6. check the privacy policy by I+Want+GNU! · · Score: 5, Informative
    First off, they can log information with or without these "web bugs." I know this because I run my own websites and I track visits because I like knowing how much traffic I'm getting, with what terms, etc.

    Given that, this article is useless.

    But even more so, if you go to the site it says at the bottom:
    This site is operated by Consumer.net and is not operated or controlled by the US Government or the telemarketing industry
    Consumer.net testified at Federal Trade Commission Workshops for Internet Privacy in 1997 and the "Do-Not-Call" Forum in 2000.
    Consumer.net authored a paper for an Online Profiling workshop at the Department of Commerce in 1998.

    The Consumer.net Privacy Policy is found at PrivacyPolicy.com
    This privacy policy states:
    Web Site Log Files: We site log files are generated that collect the IP Address of the visitor, date, time, and pages visited. Aggregate reports for web site visitors are generated that do not contain personally identifiable information.

    Advertising reports are generated that show the IP addresses of visitors who clicked on ads. This information may be sent to the advertiser to confirm the number of "click-throughs." The advertiser normally already has this information as a result of the user clicking on the adverstisement. No additional information about the visitor is supplied to the advertiser. The log files are eventually deleted.
    There. Case solved. Stop being paranoid about such silly things. If you want to be paranoid, be paranoid that the MPAA might accidentally associate your IP with file sharing even if you don't file share, or be paranoid that John Ashcroft is using the PATRIOT Act or Patriot Act II (to be introduced in Congress soon) to spy on you for reasons unrelated to terrorism (as he has done). Better yet, donate some money to the ACLU to protect your civil liberties or to the EFF to protect your electronic freedoms.
  7. Re:Off by a power of ten? by letxa2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Yeah, well to me the amazing thing in the story is that the government apparently paid AT&T $3.5 million to build the website. Have you visited the website? I've built more complex websites in a matter of weeks. Even charging $200/hour that would be easily less than $32k.

    I would hope that "building" the site for $3.5 million also includes running it, ongoing maintenance, etc. Because if the government really paid AT&T $3.5 million to BUILD it and still has to pay some ongoing fee, they got ripped by an order or two of magnitude.

    Government waste isn't surprising, but it's sad when it is made so obvious. A good percentage of the folks here at Slashdot could have done just as good a job for a fraction of the cost and STILL recorded a very good year income-wise.