Do Not Call Site Has AT&T Stats Tracker? 323
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."
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
AT&T has the server logs! (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't need a 1x1 image to track usage... they have the server logs!
Over rated (Score:1, Insightful)
AT&T is a huge corporation (Score:3, Insightful)
Ahem... (Score:5, Insightful)
huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ahem... (Score:3, Insightful)
AT&T does in fact manage it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ahem... (Score:1, Insightful)
Its to count the number of people w/o javascript.. (Score:5, Insightful)
-molo
<noscript>
<img BORDER="0" NAME="DCSIMG" WIDTH="1" HEIGHT="1" SRC="http://g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net/DCS000003_6D4Q
</noscript>
Re:should be called (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:AT&T has the server logs! (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing "weirdo" about Lynx (Score:2, Insightful)
bkr
Re:Off by a power of ten? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Not for "tracking" (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd like to point out a reason why someone might put a 1x1 pixel gif in a web page.
Not all versions of IE and Netscape (especially the versions earlier than 4 and 5 of both) render table cells correctly unless there is an object in the cell. Sometimes the cell border is not drawn, or the size specification of the cell is ignored by the browser (which then in turn messes up the layout). So a single-pixel, transparent gif or a non-breaking space character can be put in the cell to make it behave. As a occasional HTML and web page designer, a single pixel gif is a good tool to have around.
In this particular case, it is easy to assume that something illicit is intended, but the presence of the <noscript> tag makes me think that it is an attempt to track what the ratio of JavaScript vs. non-JavaScript enabled browsers visit the page. This web page has had many more visitors and induced many people that may not have the latest and greatest stuff, whomever designed it is probably just trying to figure out what fancy whiz bang tools they can get away with.
Depending on their server set up they may be simply dumping the logs, or have several of the things in the site to generate specific information. (50 million numbers, times 1.2 for revisits, times the number of objects on the page, is one hell of a lot of bits in a log file.) They could have used different hostnames for images to host them on different physical machines, or whatever to break that up.
Note, that it is trivial to set up a virtual folder to point to a separate machine to do the same thing, without using a different hostname. So if it is a tool to link up phone numbers with IP addresses and email addresses (really that's all it would do) then they didn't put much effort into hiding it.
Has anybody thought of ASKING THEM why the thing is there?
I prefer Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is also the most likely one to be true.
This Is FUD by the Telemarketing Industry (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:ATT has the contract to impliment the DNC (Score:2, Insightful)
Telemarketers can suck my disk. (Score:3, Insightful)
That's your tax dollars at work.
It only goes to prove that GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT GET INVOLVED IN STUPID STUFF LIKE WHO CAN CALL WHO. Don't like telemarketers? Nobody likes them? Then run marketing campaigns all over the damn country that tell everyone to HANG UP when a telemarketer calls! If EVERYBODY hangs up WITHOUT listening to anything that telemarketers say on the phone, then guess what? THE TELEMARKETERS WON'T CALL ANYMORE, BECAUSE IT WOULD NO LONGER BE PROFITABLE ANYMORE!!!
Logical Explanation (Score:1, Insightful)