Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy United States Your Rights Online

FTC Wants Browsers To Block Online Tracking 205

storagedude writes "The FTC wants a do-not-track mechanism that would allow Web users to opt out of online behavioral tracking, similar to the national do-not-call registry. The agency's preferred method for accomplishing this would be a browser-based tool that would give users the option of blocking data collection across the Web. The only problem is that the agency may not have the authority to require this, thanks to concerted lobbying efforts by the advertising industry. The first step may just be voluntary measures, to be released this fall."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FTC Wants Browsers To Block Online Tracking

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 29, 2010 @04:47AM (#33066226)

    There's already an opt-out option:

    https://www.torproject.org/ [torproject.org]

    Visit https://bridges.torproject.org/ [torproject.org] to grab some bridge IPs and
    add this to your torrc file:

    UseBridges 1
    paste the bridges you obtained from the url above here starting
    with the word bridge and following with the IP, one on each line,
    like so:

    Bridge 1.2.3.4
    Bridge 5.6.7.8

    Need help with Tor? Speak to the developers (and users) directly:
    irc.oftc.net #tor

    Or join the Tor mailing list: click the first url above, click
    Docs at the top of the page, scroll down for the mailing list
    information.

    If this is true:

    "The FTC wants a do-not-track mechanism that would allow Web users to
    opt out of online behavioral tracking, similar to the national do-not-call
    registry." they could encourage the use of Tor on their website, possibly
    running some tor nodes themselves to aid the Tor network.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Informative)

    by __aasqbs9791 ( 1402899 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @04:47AM (#33066232)

    That's what I thought, too, but google Quantcast and zombie cookies and you'll find out that isn't necessarily true.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Informative)

    by KibibyteBrain ( 1455987 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @05:23AM (#33066386)
    Flash cookies FTL! And when that starts to fail more, advertisers can always rely on server-side stateful tracking using whatever identifying tokens they can get(ip address, user agent, etc) to track users. The only real way to stop tracking is to compel the trackers to stop trying. Even elaborate measures like TOR can and have failed to completely prevent tracking.
  • Ghostery FF Add-on (Score:2, Informative)

    by EmagGeek ( 574360 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @06:04AM (#33066582) Journal

    Ghostery blocks all that tracking crap...

  • i have every right to say what happens on my machine

    additionally, i have every right to insist you change your behavior, such as with logs, if suitable logical reason can be found that my rights could potentially be abused by your practices

    in other words, there are principles that govern society, and no one is above those principles. and claims to be exempt from those principles, for reasons of trade and commerce, is the road to hell

    understand that, or be the enemy of freedom

    individual liberty is not trumped by corporate interest, despite all the paid legal whores and assorted apologists to the contrary

  • by buchner.johannes ( 1139593 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @07:25AM (#33066964) Homepage Journal

    And if there is no FF extension then the required functionality is probably impossible to do browser-side.

    ...

    That's all that I can think of at the moment, there may be more ways to follow a user. But I don't see much that can be done on the browser-side to stop more tracking.

    You missed the point. The summary is suggesting a server-side solution, i.e. signaling the website to bugger off.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)

    by icebraining ( 1313345 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @07:42AM (#33067068) Homepage

    Oh, you mean Flash cookies? Having Flash enabled by default is stupid anyway. Just get a flash blocker (NoScript works fine) and forget it.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 29, 2010 @08:14AM (#33067316)

    Just because you don't "click on and ad" doesn't mean that a site doesn't make revenue. There are several models in advertising and the Pay Per Click model is just one. Also, the internet advertising industry is huge. There are millions of people clicking on ads every day. I hate the type of people who expect to go to a web site for free and then use ad block. You can try to use the "i only use ad block because ads are so annoying" argument but that is BS. AdSense isn't annoying at all. Even the banner ads on this site there are no ads that I would consider annoying. It does cost money to produce content and run a website. You don't support those sites and eventually they will die. Right now it is either advertising or subscription business models. Choose which one you want, because I'm am pretty sure that you aren't going to run a website with millions of hits a month and pay for bandwidth out of your pocket (that you can't afford anyway) as a charity.

    "I already assume that nearly all ads are scams and avoid/block them. Mostly applies to Google's ads"
    Actually google does much more to filter the content of their network from my experience. These so call "Scams" (the ones people sign up for with out reading the terms which clearly state intent) are filtered by google. If it wasn't for advertising the web would have never grown to the size it is. You can think that you don't respond to advertising all you want, but the truth is that you do. You buy products everyday because of advertising and don't even try to dispute that because you can't.

    Ads work. They power the interent and allow me to get content for free. I would rather have that then a pay wall model. That being said you can use adblock if you want (no one is going to stop you) but requiring the government to stop tracking cookies will kill pay per action marketing and lead you to getting even less targeted, more intrusive ads than you get now. And for fucks sake do some research before you say "no one clicks on ads anyway". What percentage of internet users use adblock? I don't know but they are by far the minority. Lucky for you that they don't or you wouldn't be getting your fee content.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:4, Informative)

    by the_womble ( 580291 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @08:17AM (#33067336) Homepage Journal

    You enable cookies only for sites you want to log in to.

    To complete you privacy you have Flash off by default and you set a minimal UA string.

    The last two currently require plugins, but if browsers had built in click to run for plugins and sent minimal UA strings (just browser and version) be default the problem would largely be solved.

  • by internewt ( 640704 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @09:04AM (#33067762) Journal

    Here's how this will go...

    [snip sky caving in scenario]

    It's a LOSE - LOSE situation. When will people realise that well targetted and appropriate adverts are good for everyone?

    Hahaha, funny fucker.

    Oh, you're serious.

    Advertising costs companies money, so if a product is advertised it has more costs associated with it than an unadvertised product. Therefore the advertised product it is a worse deal for me. So I do not want to see the adverts.

    Adverts are maybe good for the businesses behind them, but I don't give a flying fuck about them. Adverts are definitely not in my interest, nor yours. And for you to think so.... well, I think you have been watching too much commercial TV or working too hard for corporations. You are starting to believe their bullshit!

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)

    by ArsenneLupin ( 766289 ) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @09:17AM (#33067880)
    That would help, but there's still ETag-based tracking [wikipedia.org], which is really hard to disable unless you want to make the web dog-slow by disabling all caching.

2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League

Working...