More Cookie Investigations

FancyKetchup writes "This time, C|Net is caught up in cookie paranoia with their 'special investigation' into use of cookies on the Senate and House representative websites." From the article: "Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for instance, has been a longtime advocate of strict privacy laws to restrict commercial Web sites' data collection practices. In a statement posted on his own Web site, McCain assures visitors that 'I do not use 'cookies' or other means on my Web site to track your visit in any way.' But visiting mccain.senate.gov implants a cookie on the visitor's PC that will not expire until 2035. " Follow up to a story we reported on earlier.

Comments

I wonder....

[Irish_Samurai]

I wonder how many people who think that cookies are horrible intrusions into their privacy really dig websites that auto populate their username and password when they visit them.

Cookies are just cookies

[Elixon]

I think that if NSA or others decides to keep eye on you - they don't need cookies at all :-)) They have also other more effective technologies in the pocket... So why so big bang around cookies while your phones are being tapped without the court approval?

Re: More Cookie Investigations

[JeanBaptiste]

First of all, I'm guessing its the same cookie that you get if you go to anything.senate.gov

Secondly, whats all the fuss about? Cookies are incredibly harmless compared to everything else floating around the internets. Right?

Oh well. Damn politians. I'm sure John McCain is perfectly correct. He, personally, does not use cookies to track people. He probably doesn't.

whooboy.

[User 956]

"Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for instance, has been a longtime advocate of strict privacy laws to restrict commercial Web sites' data collection practices. In a statement posted on his own Web site, McCain assures visitors that 'I do not use 'cookies' or other means on my Web site to track your visit in any way.' But visiting mccain.senate.gov implants a cookie on the visitor's PC that will not expire until 2035. "

Because, as we all know, all politicians are fully versed in technology and its myriad uses.

Re:whooboy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, as we all know, all politicians are fully versed in technology and its myriad uses.

If he allows statements to be attributed to him then he should take the time to find out whether they're true. Of course he's culpable if they aren't. There's no difference between a website and a speech that he got some guy to write for him in that regard.

Stupid Question

[Anonymous Coward]

If CNet is so concerned about the government using cookies why does CNet use cookies? Why does CNet allow their advertisers to use cookies? Why does CNet and their advertisers use Flash?

Oh, you didn't know that Flash is the new favorite means of tracking you? Hold onto your seat Tonto, you're about to get a wake up call! Flash is far more effective than any cookie ever was and no one seems to notice. Have a look at the contents of:

~/.macromedia

or

C:\Documents and Settings\User_Name\Application Data\Macromedia\

Someone needs to tell them about HTTP Sessions

[ishmalius]

Most cookies are not only not evil, they are purely mechanical.

As far as I have seen from experience, the vast majority of cookies in use today are merely for storing a user's session key. They just store your virtual "connected" status (with the otherwise connectionless HTTP) for the duration of your visit to the site, and expire and are discarded after a few minutes of idleness (usually 30 minutes).

Of course, it would be nice to not have session cookies at all, but it appears to the user to be the most transparent. The other main method is to have a session key in the URI. How many times have you seen "?sessionid='somedata'" or "?JSESSIONID='somedata'" appended to the end of a URL?

The other ways, such as hashing the agent's info (ip address, browser, etc) on the server and doing a lookup for every page request, or passing the data back and forth in 'type=hidden' form fields, are less reliable.

I think that if someone would tell the media this missing bit of info, the hype might fade, if only temporarily. There are too many Chicken Littles (Cassandras?) in the world for paranoia to take a permant holiday.

Re:Nothing to see here, move along.

[Ironsides]

I doubt McCain did this on purpose, but even if he did, should we be surprised?

One thing I'm curious about, does Sen. McCain (or anyone in his employ) run McCain.Senate.Gov or is it all together on one server with all the other Senators web sites? Basically, does he have any control over that site using cookies?

Re:Lazy sensationalist journalism

[j1m 5n0w]

The violations of privacy that people should be concerned about are not a few tracking cookies, but are in fact a widespread and ongoing monitoring and profiling of the activities of all internet users.

I agree that this isn't a significant privacy issue. However, I think the real concern is that government websites are violating their own established privacy rules. In all these cases, it was probably an honest mistake, but people really should complain loudly any time any government agency seems to consider itself above the law.

Of course, as the article says, there aren't any rules restricting congress from using cookies, only the executive branch is restricted in this way, so the earlier story about the NSA using cookies was much more relevant in that respect.

Biased summary

[Anonymous Coward]

The article summary is incredibly biased and unfair. The article does not promote cookie paranoia. It states that most uses of cookies are innocuous but that, in the worst case, they can be used to track users across multiple sites. This is entirely correct.

The main point of the article is not that congressional web sites are violating our privacy, but that congressmen are being hypocritical on the issue, by seeking to impose rules that they cannot follow themselves.

Executive Privilege

[grcumb]

"McCain assures visitors that 'I do not use 'cookies'
Bush assures citizens that 'we get court orders to do wiretaps'"

You know, this is the thing that really shorts my circuits sometimes. Here we have a president who has effectively admitted, "Yeah, so I attack foreign nations, imprison and torture anyone I want to, arbitrarily decide who's allowed to fly and who's not, spy on anyone I want to, whether the courts want me to or not." And people very earnestly debate whether this is a partisan issue, and if so, which way will the libertarians move?

But hey folks, get the rope ready, start heating the tar and plucking the chickens, 'cause the senate website has cookies!