Slashdot Mirror
Presidential Campaigns Leak Supporters' Info To Tracking Firms
Peter Eckersley writes "Stanford privacy researcher Jonathan Mayer has published new research showing that websites of both the Obama and Romney presidential campaigns, which are used to communicate with and coordinate their volunteers, leak large amounts of private information to third-party online tracking firms. The Obama campaign site leaked names, usernames, zip codes and street addresses to up to ten companies. The Romney campaign site leaked names, zip codes and partial email addresses to up to thirteen firms."
That's not so much a "leak", and more of a "take this". They probably even get paid for it.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Only in number of firms. Obama leaked more info.
Do you live in Ohio or something?
One would think that leaking less is out performing. Apparently presidents are like gaskets. Or sphincters. Take from that what you will.
but, considering that congresscritters exempted themselves from the Do Not Call phone list, it will never happen. We don't have a representative government, but one made of people who think they're better than those they supposedly represent.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
If you want to know which trackers are in use on a page, install Ghostery
I also run AdBlock Plus and NoScript.
Any other plug-ins that I'm missing?
This isn't leaking in the traditional since that someone is giving databases of information to 3rd parties. The leaking going on here has to do with GET requests to their respective web sites containing identifying information in the URL. This is probably unintentional and may not even be occurring at all since a lot of the pages use SSL and the URLs are encrypted. Of course internal analytic software can (and probably does) retain the URLs, but that's hardly "leaking" information to 3rd parties. If I was using a pay-for analytics suite and found that the people I'm paying were looking at my private information (tracking data) I would be pretty pissed off and might even consider legal action.
TLDR: No "leaking" going on here. The headline does not match the content of the article.
MONEYYYY
'Merica - FUCK YEA!
FTFY.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I think I'd rather blow a gasket.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
How do you think the US debt clock got so high?
Politicians think it is a game and the debt clock is showing their score.
I'd like to suggest $0 as a starting point & we can dutch auction our way down from there. Sounds good? :)
(it would make a refreshing change if the fuckers just sent us the money directly for our votes, don't you think...?
Of all the reasons I don't support either candidate, of all the ways either candidate is apt to violate my privacy, this is the least.
Still, I'll add it to the list.
Obama and Romney have been sending me 12 page full color magazines daily for the past twelve weeks. I think there comes a point when campaign money should be capped.
Consider yourself lucky. I get nothing. You know why? Because my vote doesn't count. I'm not in a swing state. My state is poling 55 to 40%. Your vote counts, mine is just noise.
Vote for "The debt is too damn high" party.
May Peace Prevail On Earth
monica?
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
"Without a political call exemption, the law would have been thrown out under the First Amendment of the Constitution."
Somehow, I think you really believe that. "Free speech" includes freedom _from_ speech, The DNCL is a voluntary, opt-in system. No one has any Constitutional right to contact me via a service for which I'm paying. It's not clear why you think political speech has special dispensation - there's nothing in the Constitution about what types of speech are covered.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
How does a political exemption get the Do Not Call law past the Constitution? One's right to free speech doesn't obligate me to listen to it.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
But they always get low scores.
Hey I'm Aussie. I just took the opportunity.
If they do that with donated money, what do they do with tax money?
I was thinking something involving two blonds and a midget.
I am John Hurt.
This is why I only donate through my own tiny 503(c)(4), sometimes by way of a sham 501(c)(3), so it is much easier to obscure my name. Seriously, I like to support the candidates I like, but I don't necessarily want them screwing around with my contact information or bugging me at home, so I do it as anonymously as possible.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
If I'm not mistaken, Red Cross, CARE, Oxfam, etc. do this, in fact I'm not sure who doesn't. (Mommy, I'm tired of Bronco Bama and Mitt Romney on Slashdot.)
Gently reply
So that's what Obama meant when he promised more transparency in government!
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Here is an excellent collection of resources and tools relating to security and privacy on the internet, courtesy of Tunafish at the CrunchBang Linux discussion forums. Those who want to take a slightly more 'proactive' stance against the collection of their information should find this worthwhile reading.