Slashdot Mirror
Online Ads, Privacy Remain In FTC Crosshairs
AC95 writes "The FTC wants to give users a browser-based tool for opting out of online behavioral tracking, a proposal that has privacy advocates cheering and online advertisers up in arms. A key issue, says FTC attorney Loretta Garrison, is that while most consumers know they're tracked online, they don't fully appreciate how much information is collected. Tim O'Reilly, founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, worries about knee-jerk legislation criminalizing mistakes that are an inherent part of applying any new technology."
They should just make it illegal to collect personal information for sale period!
I don't want no stinking toolbar to help me out... F those data miners!
Really Tim O'Reilly? Maybe criminalizing mistakes that affect the identity of citizens MIGHT make you more aware so those mistakes don't happen again.
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. But light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
You can stop trackers if you use Firefox. I use Ghostery but you could also use No script and block everything.
If you can't fight it, exploit it. I have actually gotten some pretty cool (free) stuff by misrepresenting myself to various sites online (up to the legal limit, of course).Everything from free Amazon gift cards, to free electronics. I even got a free mobile phone (with service paid for 6 months) once because I claimed I had a business with over 100 employees and that I made over $100K yearly (that was back in 1998 when phones were pricier and I only made about 1/3 of that). Free magazine subscriptions, free enterprise web hosting, free lawnmowers, it's all there for the taking for those willing to game the game.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
Opt-out is better than nothing, but it's a pansy-assed attempt to keep industry "involved". Opt-in is really the only logical solution to privacy issues.
It's hard to be objective about whether to want to protect my privacy or not given I have zero idea of what Google's profile of me looks like. I imagine everyone has some threshold level where they say "Enough is enough, I'm not willing to sacrifice THAT info for free services." I would guess we all probably fall into two camps- either dramatically underestimating or dramatically overestimating the level of information stored in the profile. Without better specifics in the hands of the populace about the level of personal details, it doesn't seem to me that a fair level of regulation can possibly be drafted by public officials.
Advertisers didn't like the idea of a do-not-call list to restrict telemarketers from calling/harassing consumers who didn't want to be bothered either, but people are still pretty happy with it. Now advertising companies are collecting (and even selling) a lot of personal data about consumers who don't even know such data exists, and advertisers are upset that the government might give them a way to opt out of their system. How is this any different? Also, I know this isn't how things are done in Washington, but in a democracy shouldn't the government be answering to its concerned citizens instead of just focusing on what makes things easy/profitable/convenient/one-sided for large corporations?
I only accept cookies from sites I trust. Yes this sometimes causes problems on untrusted sites - which gives me further reason to not trust them! If a web designer does not anticipate "no cookie" users, their intention is to give your privacy a good shafting.
need a free COBOL editor for Windows?
I'm not sure what that means in this context.
If I tell you not to put any cookies on my machine, then DON'T.
And don't sneak around to other websites to find my IP address, either.
Just forget I ever visit more than one site.
No mistake about that.
I got a taste of this when I went looking online for vacations. I saw "club med" ads on every page I went to for a good two weeks. It got really creepy after a while. I went away but NOT to Club Med.
I'm all for the FTC cracking down on online advertising and tracking. Who are we kidding though? Have you seen some of the stuff that happens offline? Has anyone taken a look at what Nielsen is up to? They have insane levels of demographic data available on EVERYONE. Every single one of us has already been pigeon holed and stereotyped based on our buying habits, where we live, what kind of car we drive, etc.
Take a look at this.
http://en-us.nielsen.com/content/nielsen/en_us/product_families/nielsen_claritas/prizm.html
Emphasis mine.
"PRIZM defines every U.S. household in terms of 66 demographically and behaviorally distinct types, or "segments," to help marketers discern consumer behavior: their likes, dislikes, lifestyles, purchase behaviors and media preferences. Used by thousands of marketers within Fortune 500 companies, PRIZM provides the "lingua franca" for marketing in an increasingly diverse and complex American marketplace. Because PRIZM is linked to the surveys and panels of most major marketing databases in the U.S., the segmentation system enables you to target on virtually any purchase and media behavior."
I'm all for the FTC/government cracking down on behavioural tracking, but how would such a system work and how could it even be policed?
In the case of the Do-Not-Call system:
How would such a system translate to the web? (And I say the web as opposed to the internet as a whole, since the web seems to be where the battlefront is at the moment.)
Possiblities:
What about enforcement? How can you tell if someone is tracking you? How can you provably report it to the government so that they can do something about it?
Unfortunately it sounds like a bit of a pipe dream to me.
...the following extensions: BetterPrivacy, Ghostery, NoScript, Ad Block Plus, TrackMeNot, RequestPolicy into Private Browsing mode. Flash cookies are the evilest as they persist, learn to destroy these in any OS or browser you use.
This is the least of my privacy concerns on the internet. Seeing ads for things I'm interested in is better than seeing ads for things I'm not interested in, right?
I'd certainly change my mind in some unspeakable horror was revealed, but my default stance is not to hang too much importance on it.
As long as individuals have the same right to spy as companies I have no issue at all with data collection. It is only when government of groups with privilege have powers that the public does not that there is a problem.
I use and recommend Adblock Plus, Better Privacy, CustomizeGoogle, Flashblock, NoScript and RequestPolicy. This combination allows for extraordinarily fine grained control over what sort of information is tracked from session to session. Now, if you log into a site using an account controlled by that site then they are going to track some clicks regardless of what addons are used, but if you are logging in with a named account then you probably already knew that.
but if you are logging in with a named account then you probably already knew that.
Which is an interesting point. As the web has more and more 'big players' how often are people 'logged in' without really paying attention to the fact because they're logged in for a different function and forget that the two functions are connected?
I'm embarassed to admit that I'd forgotten how often I'm logged into gmail in another tab while using google search...
I'm embarassed to admit that I'd forgotten how often I'm logged into gmail in another tab while using google search...
The precise source of said embarrassment is left up to the imagination of the reader...
Here are some more data that leaks when surfing.
http://web.comhem.se/u79/Privacy.php
But also a several solutions.
I use and recommend Adblock Plus, Better Privacy, CustomizeGoogle, Flashblock, NoScript and RequestPolicy. This combination allows for extraordinarily fine grained control over what sort of information is tracked from session to session. Now, if you log into a site using an account controlled by that site then they are going to track some clicks regardless of what addons are used, but if you are logging in with a named account then you probably already knew that.
I also use TACO. Why do we need government action, when all the tools are already here?
I use ghostery firefox plugin to block some tracking javascript tools. Seems pretty useful but I'm sure there is more that can be done.
http://www.ghostery.com/
Another useful tool is ghostery http://www.ghostery.com/
10 ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER BROWSER ADDONS ALONE, & EVEN DNS SERVERS:
1.) HOSTS files eat A LOT LESS CPU cycles than browser addons do no less (since browser addons have to parse each HTML page & tag content in them)!
2.) HOSTS files are also NOT severely LIMITED TO 1 BROWSER FAMILY ONLY... browser addons, are. HOSTS files cover & protect (for security) and speed up (all apps that are webbound) any app you have that goes to the internet (specifically the web).
3.) HOSTS files allow you to bypass DNS Server requests logs (via hardcoding your favorite sites into them to avoid not only the TIME taken roundtrip to an external DNS server, but also for avoiding those logs OR a DNS server that has been compromised (see Dan Kaminsky online, on that note)).
4.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).
5.) HOSTS files also allow you to not worry about a DNS server being compromised, or downed (if either occurs, you STILL get to sites you hardcode in a HOSTS file anyhow in EITHER case).
6.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, updated and obtained (for reliable ones see mvps.org ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano or kate (etc.)
7.) HOSTS files aren't as vulnerable to "bugs" either like programs/libs/extensions of that nature are, OR even DNS servers, as they are NOT code, & because of what's next too
8.) HOSTS files are also EASILY secured well, via write-protection "read-only" attributes set on them, or more radically, via ACL's even.
9.) HOSTS files are a solution which also globally extends to EVERY WEBBOUND APP YOU HAVE - NOT just a single webbrowser type (e.g. FireFox/Mozilla & its addons exemplify this, such as ADBLOCK) and you already own one, and they run on any OS that uses the BSD reference design IP stack (all of them today pretty much if NOT all of them).
10.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - You might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own, & this? This stops that cold, too! Bonus...
Still, it's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock, &/or NoScript!
(Especially the latter one in NoScript: I mention it, because it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript (which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security").
****
Of course, you also have to note that ADBLOCK IS DETECTABLE ITSELF, AND BLOCKABLE, also! Proof? Ok:
----
ArsTechnica blocking Adblock?
https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5266
----
However, they could NOT do that to HOSTS files users though! So, due to that? See the above 10 points in favor of HOSTS files (especially over adblock alone)...
APK
10 ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER BROWSER ADDONS ALONE, & EVEN DNS SERVERS:
1.) HOSTS files eat A LOT LESS CPU cycles than browser addons do no less (since browser addons have to parse each HTML page & tag content in them)!
2.) HOSTS files are also NOT severely LIMITED TO 1 BROWSER FAMILY ONLY... browser addons, are. HOSTS files cover & protect (for security) and speed up (all apps that are webbound) any app you have that goes to the internet (specifically the web).
3.) HOSTS files allow you to bypass DNS Server requests logs (via hardcoding your favorite sites into them to avoid not only the TIME taken roundtrip to an external DNS server, but also for avoiding those logs OR a DNS server that has been compromised (see Dan Kaminsky online, on that note)).
4.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).
5.) HOSTS files also allow you to not worry about a DNS server being compromised, or downed (if either occurs, you STILL get to sites you hardcode in a HOSTS file anyhow in EITHER case).
6.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, updated and obtained (for reliable ones see mvps.org ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano or kate (etc.)
7.) HOSTS files aren't as vulnerable to "bugs" either like programs/libs/extensions of that nature are, OR even DNS servers, as they are NOT code, & because of what's next too
8.) HOSTS files are also EASILY secured well, via write-protection "read-only" attributes set on them, or more radically, via ACL's even.
9.) HOSTS files are a solution which also globally extends to EVERY WEBBOUND APP YOU HAVE - NOT just a single webbrowser type (e.g. FireFox/Mozilla & its addons exemplify this, such as ADBLOCK) and you already own one, and they run on any OS that uses the BSD reference design IP stack (all of them today pretty much if NOT all of them).
10.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - You might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own, & this? This stops that cold, too! Bonus...
Still, it's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock, &/or NoScript!
(Especially the latter one in NoScript: I mention it, because it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript (which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security").
****
Of course, you also have to note that ADBLOCK IS DETECTABLE ITSELF, AND BLOCKABLE, also! Proof? Ok:
----
ArsTechnica blocking Adblock?
https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5266
----
However, they could NOT do that to HOSTS files users though! So, due to that? See the above 10 points in favor of HOSTS files (especially over adblock alone)...
APK
P.S.=> Best part of all is, HOSTS files are 100% FREE, and they work (you already own one) and reliable reputables copies can be obtained from these sources: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm (MVPS version) as a single example thereof... apk
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.
"I haven't seen this copy-pasta spam in ages." - by sexconker (1179573) on Thursday September 09, @11:35AM (#33522616)
You're more than welcome to attempt to disprove any of its 10 (actually 11) points, on a technical level, anytime you wish. Good luck, you'll need it on that account of course, because I've seen a lot of trolling fools like yourself state things like you have, but never disprove, the 10++ points in favor of HOSTS files (versus adblock, dns servers, or other methods (for blocking ads, speeding up a system online, and securing it as well in the same single file only)).
----
"It only gets more retarded with time." - by sexconker (1179573) on Thursday September 09, @11:35AM (#33522616)
Funniest part is that BEST a trolling dolt like you or "your kind" has? Is assinine remarks like that which you just stated (however, they're always lacking any technical substance that disproves that 10++ points in favor of HOSTS files I put up vs. other inferior methods for speeding up and securing a personal computer).
APK
P.S.=> Of course, I doubt this trolling waste of life "sexconker" will even bother reply, but it's just satisfying watching trolling scumbags who are "registered lusers" post things like he did, and not have anything technically pertinent to say at the same time that disproves what I wrote. That's when I know I did a decent job of my post vs. the trolling trash that hangs around here unfortunately... apk
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1781304&cid=33521660 See subject line first, and that url second, as well as the 2 replies beneath it, inclusive of sexconker's own (where sexconker had to shut up quickly afterwards, lmao, because he shot his stupid mouth off as is his usual and then sexconker had nothing technically pertinent in reply afterwards, and was forced to sit there with his piehole absolutely shut down, for his retarded idiot's profane reply, in utter silence - priceless!)
Sexconker, You only get yourself modded down here all week constantly with replies like that one you just gave here in this thread sexconker (no technical merit to your reply at all is why, just off topic ad hominem attack flamebait material) and the 3 others you gave that same day which got you modded down as troll here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1783530&cid=33537720 , redundant here
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1783530&cid=33537680 , and flamebait here also http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1782468&cid=33528218 . Grow up sexconker. Of course, to a multiple registered account using troll like you it doesn't matter. You'll just jump to another of your multiple registered user account here on this forums as you do on others too and do more of the same. Once again: Grow up sexconker. Might as well make this point too: On your "copy pasta" crap? The ac apk posts it, it is his own material, so it's only he copying and pasting his own material which apparently is beyond your ability to dispute and disprove. There is a problem with that? I don't see any problems in posting one's own words, other than you being a jack ass in your comment sexconker and your inability to prove any of his points incorrect technically.
sexconker, we see you weren't satisfied being modded down 3 times in a row the day after the stupid post you made in this exchange here http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1781304&cid=33559618 , but you also got yourself modded down another 2 times the next day after that as well for being a troll http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1786126&cid=33579050 and for flamebait http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1786842&cid=33578900 (your usual two mod down reasons you usually get no less from those that downrate your posts, and rightfully so).
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1790132&cid=33612042 So how many is that in less than 1 week's time already? A dozen or more?? LMAO!
Sexconker "mellowed down" (lol, modded down actually), to troll, here too, along with those other urls he's been shown to have been modded down at this week? Man... Utterly priceless.